is hunting cruel?

Vegeta

Wicknight wrote:

Isn't hunting with birds of prey still legal in Britian?


Well I imagine because pro-fox hunt supporters put up the biggest protest. The 2004 Hunting Act in Britian outlaws a number of hunting, not just fox hunting.

Who mentioned Britian, I have been talking about Ireland this whole time.

I think "they" do. Unethical treatment of animals in farms is an issue that is often in the media.

it gets nowhere near the same reaction though. how many people sabotage big farms. How mant people protest weekly outside the Dail about it

Zombrex

Vegeta wrote:

Can chase a deer for 13 miles and can travel 60 miles in a night. They trot at 10 miles an hour and can keep that pace for several hours. Not exactly slow now is it.

Compared to what? It is slow compared to the speed they used in a chase, which can be over 40 miles an hour. At 10 miles an hour the wolf is basically walking.

Vegeta wrote:

Maybe not as severe but if you think a fox would not be killed by a pack of wild dogs then you are living in a fantasy land

When have I ever said that? The only natural predator foxes have in the wild is wolves, of course they will be killed by wolves.

The point is that a fox would not be chased by a wolf pack the way they are chased by a pack of hounds. That would never happen in nature.

As such foxes are not designed to deal with that form of attack because, until the middle ages, such an form of chase would never happen so evolution would never have developed a countered it.

Therefore the claim that foxes are naturally able to deal with the stress of the hunt doesn't hold up, because the fox hunt is not a replica of a natural hunt.

We know that other mammals, such as deer, specifically cannot deal with the stress of a prolonged human hunt, for exactly these reasons. It is very unlikely that foxes have developed some natural ability to do so in the last 500 years since fox hunting became popular.

Vegeta wrote:

I think they would.

Why?

Firstly why would wolves hunt the fox in this fashion. The only purpose of hunting in this manner is the entertainment of the humans involved. The humans have to know where the hounds which means the fox knows where the hounds are. There is no natural advantage given to the hounds by hunting this way, in fact it is a very inefficant way to hunt from the point of view of the animals involved, as demonstrated by the fact that the fox often gets away because they are being constantly alerted to the fact that the hounds are there and after them.

Secondly what would the wolf pack eat to regain the large amounts of energy used in chasing down a fox like this?

Zombrex

Vegeta wrote:

Who mentioned Britian, I have been talking about Ireland this whole time.

Apologies I though this was in relation to countries that have already banned fox hunting through government.

Vegeta wrote:

it gets nowhere near the same reaction though. how many people sabotage big farms. How mant people protest weekly outside the Dail about it

Well I'm not sure how do tell which gets the bigger reaction. I've seen people protest fox hunting and I've seen people protest against unethical farming practises. Neither cause seems to get much media attention in Ireland.

Vegeta

Wicknight wrote:

Compared to what? It is slow compared to the speed they used in a chase, which can be over 40 miles an hour. At 10 miles an hour the wolf is basically walking.

no they walk at approx 4 miles per hour bout the same as us. Try running at 10 miles per hour on the thread mil some time. it'll give you a decent perspective

When have I ever said that? The only natural predator foxes have in the wild is wolves, of course they will be killed by wolves.

The point is that a fox would not be chased by a wolf pack the way they are chased by a pack of hounds. That would never happen in nature.

As such foxes are not designed to deal with that form of attack because, until the middle ages, such an form of chase would never happen so evolution would never have developed a countered it.

Therefore the claim that foxes are naturally able to deal with the stress of the hunt doesn't hold up, because the fox hunt is not a replica of a natural hunt.

We know that other mammals, such as deer, specifically cannot deal with the stress of a prolonged human hunt, for exactly these reasons. It is very unlikely that foxes have developed some natural ability to do so in the last 500 years since fox hunting became popular.

I have nothing against the arguement that the fox might not feel it or be stressed at the time. I am not saying a fox can deal with the stress or the fox doesn't feel pain at the time, I have not made that claim. (Does bring up the point though of how long is the average fox hunted for, i don't know) Which leads me on to ...

Why?

Because wolves don't just eat big game, they also eat beaver, rabbits and even mice. So I think they would eat a fox given the opportunity. Also the whole pack doesn't hunt every single item. They will hunt for smaller prey themselves. The need for a pack is for bigger prey.

Now wether the fox suffers as much stress being chased by a pack of inefficient hounds (considering how often the fox escapes) is the same as a career killer like a wolf is anyones guess.

My point is the end result is the same death by teeth.

Firstly why would wolves hunt the fox in this fashion. The only purpose of hunting in this manner is the entertainment of the humans involved. The humans have to know where the hounds which means the fox knows where the hounds are. There is no natural advantage given to the hounds by hunting this way, in fact it is a very inefficant way to hunt from the point of view of the animals involved, as demonstrated by the fact that the fox often gets away because they are being constantly alerted to the fact that the hounds are there and after them.

Secondly what would the wolf pack eat to regain the large amounts of energy used in chasing down a fox like this?

The wolf (singular) would eat the fox. it doesn't take a pack to kill a beaver/rabbit/mouse/fox etc

Yes fox hunting is not natural, neither is shooting, fishing and maybe even farming if you want to get serious about it (who are we as a race to think we can domesticate a species). Is it natural to domesticate a speices????? I wouldn't say so

I cant even ride a horse but hate the press that hunting on horse back gets, Joe Duffy was it 2-3 weeks ago is a prime example.

In my opinion your are either all or nothing. If you are against blood sports you should be against all animal suffering. I hate people who say fox hunting is so cruel yet they have no problem munching down a steak or eating chicken, when in all likelyhood that chicken or cow has suffered more over its entire life than that fox who was chased and killed by a pack of dogs.

Wicknight I respect you, at least you have some background to base your opinion on. The people in here with the one-liners "fox hunting is so cruel and is just wrong" you can bet your ass they are not vegans. Not everyone on here is like Tar.Aldarion

So my two main points are. I don't know either way if a fox suffers more or less than if it was hunted by hounds (who by your own admittance are terribly inefficient) or by a natural predator like a wolf.

If you are going to call someone cruel for killing animals you better be going out of your way to live your life in a manner which causes as little animal suffering as possible.

Now I am leaving work for the night but will continue the debate tomorrow

Zombrex

Vegeta wrote:

no they walk at approx 4 miles per hour bout the same as us. Try running at 10 miles per hour on the thread mil some time. it'll give you a decent perspective

I have run 10 miles an hour on a tread mil, and it is tough. But I don't have 4 legs.

Wolves travel normally at about 8 to 10 miles an hour. Technically this is a trot not a walk, but the principle is the same. It is there standard speed, and it is the speed they move at most.

Vegeta wrote:

Because wolves don't just eat big game, they also eat beaver, rabbits and even mice. So I think they would eat a fox given the opportunity.

As I have already said the only natural predator foxes have ever had in Ireland or Britian in the last 10,000 years were wolves. I know wolves will hunt a fox. That is not the issue, it has never been the issue.

The point is that wild wolves would not hunt a fox anything like the way that fox hounds do during a fox hunt.

Vegeta wrote:

Now wether the fox suffers as much stress being chased by a pack of inefficient hounds (considering how often the fox escapes) is the same as a career killer like a wolf is anyones guess.

Well really it is the heart of the this particular argument.

The pro-hunt people say the fox doesn't suffer any more stress than they are biologically capable of dealing with due to naturally evolving to deal with the stress of being hunted by wolves.

I find little reason to accept that position, and an examination of the circumstances of what a fox hunt is actually like would suggest the exact opposite.

A fox hunt is not the same circumstances that a fox would experience when being hunted by wolves, so one cannot say that the foxes biology is suited to deal with this circumstance.

Vegeta wrote:

My point is the end result is the same death by teeth.

I've no issue what that point, but as I said that was never what was being debated.

Vegeta wrote:

Yes fox hunting is not natural, neither is shooting, fishing and maybe even farming

I know. The evolution of a species like a fox has not caught up to the vast majority of changes of environment the fox has found itself in. That is kinda my point.

Vegeta wrote:

Is it natural to domesticate a speices????? I wouldn't say so

I would agree. Which is another reason why fox hounds aren't like wild wolves.

Vegeta wrote:

If you are against blood sports you should be against all animal suffering.

Is the opposite true?

That if you are for blood sports you should be for all forms of animal suffering? Dog fighting? Badger baiting? Throwing a bag of cats on a bondfire to hear them scream (which they used to do in the 17th century)?

You see viewing the issue in such black and white terms doesn't really work. I think you would be hard pressed to find someone within the hunting community who didn't have a issue with thrown cats into a fire for fun.

I don't have any great problem killing foxes. My issue has always been the why and the how.

I don't accept that the fox doesn't suffer during a fox hunt. Fox hunting is an unnatural circumstance for a fox to find itself in, it is seriously doubtful that it has the ability to deal with the stress it is put under in any evolutionary manner. We know other mammals cannot deal with the stress of a human hunt, I don't see any reason to think that foxes are different. Therefore even if the fox escapes it is damaged by simply being in the hunt.

I don't think the argument that it makes the horse riding experience better is a justifiable reason to kill a fox, any more than saying "I like gambling" is a reason to have two bears rip each other appart in a Russian pub.

I accept that this is just my opinion.

At the end of the day one has to agree to certain common ethical grounds before they can agree to consequences of those grounds. If this doesn't happen then there is no common ground to argue this point, and ultimately it becomes pointless. Some think it is wrong no matter what. Some think it is ok if the fox doesn't suffer unnaturally. Some don't care about that and think it is ok because it is just a dumb fox. Others seems to just like foxes and have no trouble seriously injuring the humans, horses and the hounds to allow the fox to escape, which to be honest is a position I don't even understand let alone support.

doctor evil

There is skill in those who work for the hunt who have to control the hounds. The rest of the field are there for the ride and the social element, they pay caps to be there which keeps the hunt running.

togster

Wicknight wrote:

I don't have any great problem killing foxes. My issue has always been the why and the how..

And that was the purpose of this thread to determine peoples limits regarding the fox hunting. I think wicknight has argued sensibly and coherently even though i dont agree with most things. However too often in this debate in the public domain both sides seem to sensationalise the argument.

Wicknight wrote:

At the end of the day one has to agree to certain common ethical grounds before they can agree to consequences of those grounds. If this doesn't happen then there is no common ground to argue this point, and ultimately it becomes pointless. Some think it is wrong no matter what. Some think it is ok if the fox doesn't suffer unnaturally. Some don't care about that and think it is ok because it is just a dumb fox. Others seems to just like foxes and have no trouble seriously injuring the humans, horses and the hounds to allow the fox to escape, which to be honest is a position I don't even understand let alone support.

There are extremists on both sides. The antis in some areas have actually broken horses legs. I have also heard of hunting people whipping antis. It is these elements which too often prevent the issue being debated in a sensible manner and i think this thread has so far managed debated the issue fairly.

I think however this issue of cruelty comes down to the individuals perception of what is morally dubious or otherwise. Myself i think the practice of foxhunting is accptable but to others it should be stopped.
The other side issues (drag hunting, chasing times, damage to livestock) really are irrelevant as the central issue is the individuals perception of cruelty.
If anyone goes to tom hardiman could you please let me know what it was like. I am away at the moment and would liked to have attended.

togster

Wicknight wrote:

Isn't hunting with birds of prey still legal in Britian?



.

Yes hunting with birds of prey is legal. The hunts are allowed to flush foxes from coverts where they are dispatched using guns or are killed using birds of prey. So the problem isnt the actual death of the fox but the manner in which it is killed ie the chase etc (wicknights argument). So then it seems that it is ok for the fox to experience some stress just not long periods of it.
Where does one draw the line with that??