Fox hunting poll in todays Irish Times

Vegeta

MsFifers wrote: »

What does that mean exactly? If you "own" an animal you treat it kindly, and if you don't you can terrorise it?

Would you let your dogs chase and try to kill a stray cat? If not - why not? Because it would be cruel?

There is no logic to your arguments.

Doe you own a cat, I hope not due to the cruelty it inflicts on the local mice and song bird population

cowzerp

Vegeta wrote: »

There are loads of pictures of game in that thread (which are eaten) so "vermin control" only applies when its vermin.

Are you a vegan family? The reason I ask is because your kids might get a bit of a shock when they realise animals are being killed/suffer to feed them or for other products like leather etc. Or is that ok because someone else has to do the killing?

When i was in oz, the lads i was with hunted and killed a goat with a crossbow, i was with them-it was very quick and they used the coat and the meat off the goat, i had no moral problem with this-if we left it dead by the side of the road i would have said it was immoral and done just for the sake of killing. if its done for pleasure and for no good reason there is something wrong.

cowzerp

Vegeta wrote: »

Doe you own a cat, I hope not due to the cruelty it inflicts on the local mice and song bird population

Thats natural, not organised by a bunch of pompous snobs.

Vegeta

cowzerp wrote: »

When i was in oz, the lads i was with hunted and killed a goat with a crossbow, i was with them-it was very quick and they used the coat and the meat off the goat, i had no moral problem with this-if we left it dead by the side of the road i would have said it was immoral and done just for the sake of killing. if its done for pleasure and for no good reason there is something wrong.

Can I ask did you enjoy being out in the countryside?

Did you enjoy the show of skill needed to get close to a goat with a crossbow?

Did you enjoy the meat?

Did you enjoy the death of the animal?

togster

cowzerp wrote: »

When i was in oz, the lads i was with hunted and killed a goat with a crossbow, i was with them-it was very quick and they used the coat and the meat off the goat, i had no moral problem with this-if we left it dead by the side of the road i would have said it was immoral and done just for the sake of killing. if its done for pleasure and for no good reason there is something wrong.

So they killed this goat with a bow and arrow and used its coat for what?
Did their survival depend upon it? I mean would you have died without killing this helpless goat?
So are you saying that if we hunt the fox and eat it and use its fur everyhing is OK?
Because to follow your point to conclusion that is what you are saying?

peasant

Vegeta wrote: »

Doe you own a cat, I hope not due to the cruelty it inflicts on the local mice and song bird population

just as an aside ...the damage a cat can do can easily be minimised by keeping it inside during the night and dusk & dawn

Vegeta

cowzerp wrote: »

Thats natural, not organised by a bunch of pompous snobs.

So pack animals (hounds) chasing prey (fox) is suddenly un-natural. Not true I fear

So lets say there were no pompous snobs (not that I believe there are any) does it suddenly change from being un-natural to natural. I think not

togster

Vegeta wrote: »

So pack animals (hounds) chasing prey (fox) is suddenly un-natural. Not true I fear

So lets say there were no pompous snobs (not that I believe there are any) does it suddenly change from being un-natural to natural. I think not

Very good point.

Vegeta

peasant wrote: »

just as an aside ...the damage a cat can do can easily be minimised by keeping it inside during the night and dusk & dawn

peasant don't tell me you own one of the vile creatures

Only cold hearted scum bastards own such mice killers. They rip them apart and eat them. its sick

Clearly Joking

peasant

As we are going round in circles, I think it's about time, I resurrected a post from page one (yes, page 1!) of this thread:

Originally Posted by It wasn't me!
It contributes to effective vermin control, albeit a small part of it. For every fox killed by dogs, hundreds are shot every week.

Thank you!

End of debate ...you've just proven (and conceded to) the point that foxhunting (the dog-pack/horseback version) is pointless.

It can therefore be classified as what it is ...an act of needless animal cruelty that should be banned.


I rest my case.

cowzerp

To answer togser and vegeta, i got no joy out of the goat been killed, i ate it because i would have felt terrible if it was killed for the purpose of fun, nobody else ate it, i taste like crap! the coat was used as a mat and again this meant that something came out of the goat been killed, in oz goats are ferrell animals and cause all the natural animals to die off, the death was instant and not torture,

i wear leather and at least the animal that supplied it was used for good reason and not tortured so i cn have leather, i eat meat and try to eat free range food, do you eat the fox? if there vermin why cant they just be shot by an expert and not tortured?

my brother shot about 50 rabbits in an army barracks that was over ran with them, he then gave all the rabbits to the cook and they all had rabbit stew for dinner, he may have enjoyed it! i dont know, but he used the kill for a good reason.. dont compare your torture of animals to this..

Vegeta

peasant wrote: »

As we are going round in circles, I think it's about time, I resurrected a post from page one (yes, page 1!) of this thread:

and as i have already shown a small % of vermin control is better than zero so your arguement falls down.

cowzerp

Vegeta wrote: »

So pack animals (hounds) chasing prey (fox) is suddenly un-natural. Not true I fear

So lets say there were no pompous snobs (not that I believe there are any) does it suddenly change from being un-natural to natural. I think not

If they where wild dogs chasing a fox i'd say it was natural, been bred for this purpose and lead by snobs is not, so the answer is yes it does change from natural to un natural..anyway fox is not a natural prey for dogs anyway, rabbits, birds, lambs etc would be..

togster

cowzerp wrote: »

To answer togser and vegeta, i got no joy out of the goat been killed, i ate it because i would have felt terrible if it was killed for the purpose of fun, nobody else ate it, i taste like crap! the coat was used as a mat and again this meant that something came out of the goat been killed, in oz goats are ferrell animals and cause all the natural animals to die off, the death was instant and not torture,

i wear leather and at least the animal that supplied it was used for good reason and not tortured so i cn have leather, i eat meat and try to eat free range food, do you eat the fox? if there vermin why cant they just be shot by an expert and not tortured?

my brother shot about 50 rabbits in an army barracks that was over ran with them, he then gave all the rabbits to the cook and they all had rabbit stew for dinner, he may have enjoyed it! i dont know, but he used the kill for a good reason.. dont compare your torture of animals to this..

No but you said you went hunting with some guys in australia. You used a bog and arrow and shot the goat. I asked you (and you didn't answer) if we ate the fox or used its fur would you have a problem with what we did? And if so why? What you did in Oz was no different to what we do here. You partook in an exercise for enjoyment (or was it survival?) then you ate the goat because you felt guilty. Right? Are you also suggesting the goat experienced no stress during your hunt?

Whispered

Vegeta wrote: »

Also I suppose no-one here owns a cat because lord knows how hard you'd cry at night knowing your cat is outside killing mice, song birds etc

I own a cat, two in fact, and I dont cry at night over them killing songbirds or mice as I keep them in at night, during the day they have full access to the house so i suspect they sleep most of the day and also they have bells to try minimise what they kill. I try stop them doing it and most certainly dont organise it! Cats hunting, while not being very nice, is natural. To be honest I take the same stance with hunting with one or two dogs, it's almost a fair contest then. But you cant compare a hunt of 50+ dogs, flusing everything out thats in it's way, with a cat hunting.

Granted I have never been on a hunt but I have, as a child, gone with my father with his dogs, and at the time there was a fascination with how his two terriers and lurcher worked together. It was pretty amazing to watch, they almost read each others minds! Hated the kill part, but it was very rare it happened. (perhaps because I was there and used to get upset dear old dad delayed letting the lurcher into the chase) I can't imagine that type of communication in such a large pack? My view of a hunt is simply a blanket of noise which scares everything out of hiding and takes little skill or communication on the part of the dogs.

Whispered

Vegeta wrote: »

So pack animals (hounds) chasing prey (fox) is suddenly un-natural. Not true I fear

So lets say there were no pompous snobs (not that I believe there are any) does it suddenly change from being un-natural to natural. I think not

Is the size of the pack natural?

togster

cowzerp wrote: »

If they where wild dogs chasing a fox i'd say it was natural, been bred for this purpose and lead by snobs is not, so the answer is yes it does change from natural to un natural..anyway fox is not a natural prey for dogs anyway, rabbits, birds, lambs etc would be..

Eh a wolf is a fox's natural predator. A hound is a descendant of wolf. Am i wrong?

togster

helena.ryan wrote: »

Is the size of the pack natural?

That has no bearing on anything with respect. The reason we use a large pack is to draw large covers. It is the "lead" hound who takes up the scent. The hounds do not ambush the fox, they hunt on scent. So numbers have no bearing.

Whispered

togster wrote: »

The reason we use a large pack is to draw large covers.

What does that mean?

togster

helena.ryan wrote: »

I can't imagine that type of communication in such a large pack? My view of a hunt is simply a blanket of noise which scares everything out of hiding and takes little skill or communication on the part of the dogs.

Well then you would be wrong! I can see you have learnt alot from watching the lurcher and terriers work. In the pack of hounds (usually 20-30hounds) there is a hierarchy. With experience the pack learns to watch the more senior members of the pack. The same hounds will draw the flanks of the covert and others will draw center. It is not a blanket of noise. The hounds (lead hounds) bay upon taking up scent. The people on horses stay quiet as the hounds draw a covert.

togster

helena.ryan wrote: »

What does that mean?

Sorry. A covert is an area of scub or forest. To draw it means to flush it.

Bendihorse

There is a food chain for a reason, without that the whole balance of ecology in the world would be upset. Anyone that claims to be an 'animal lover' should understand this.

Humans are at the top, we chase and kill those things lower than us on the chain, as does every carnivorous animal right down along that chain to herbivores (Who also get hunted and chased by animals in the wild). I guess its some form of instinct that’s in us. Media and misinformation has succeeded in abating this in some folk, if that’s how they choose to live and be, then I'm guessing that they don’t wear leather shoes or eat meat, right??

I would also like to define the word 'wild natural habitat' here, that being the plains of Africa and broad masses of land that remain relatively untouched and un-interfered with by humans. The food chain there still works. Unfortunately some animals have been poached to extinction but there is still a natural predator present for every animal in the form of the Great Lion.
Varying levels of human intervention here and agriculture mean that the natural ecologic system in Ireland has been unbalanced and the natural predator of the fox has been removed.

While the fox is still vermin, they should be hunted in whatever fashion is needed to keep them under control. The number of foxes in the wild is currently 'controllable' (although I know I have seen many more about in the past few years than I can remember in a while) they are not on an endangered species list and are therefore fair game to stalked and hunted the same way as they do to their prey.

Any animal that eats meat has to hunt and chase to kill. Therefore animals hunt chase kill and 'terrorise' just like humans do. It’s the circle of life.

Quite frankly that’s all I have to say on the matter because I am sick trying to explain this to people that have their minds made up about something based on films on youtube, photos in the paper, grossly inflated and somewhat fabricated stories from Anti organisations.

If you ask someone in the morning who has no real knowledge of hunting if they thing it should be banned, then 99% of them will say ‘Yes’ as they don’t know enough about it themselves to make an informed decision so its safer to say that it should be banned.

If you want to understand something and have an opinion on it then go out there and experience it yourself. People that are misinformed should not be asked to vote on something that they know nothing about. That’s not democracy, that’s like giving a child a gun to play with.

cowzerp

togster wrote: »

if we ate the fox or used its fur would you have a problem with what we did? And if so why?

Yes i would, its the torture bit that bothers me most. and there would not be enough to go around anyway.

togster wrote: »

What you did in Oz was no different to what we do here. You partook in an exercise for enjoyment (or was it survival?) then you ate the goat because you felt guilty. Right?

Not true, the goat was killed instant and did not even no about it, the crossbow was as powerful as a rifle. we where in the bush 7 hours drive from anywhere so i can say it was for survival, either way, the kill was used and not just killed for fun.

togster wrote: »

Are you also suggesting the goat experienced no stress during your hunt

as said above, it was instant, the goat was unaware. not even a yelp.

Hellrazer

togster wrote: »

I thought you said different a minute ago. Apologies.

Em nope--I said hunting for vermin control was "acceptable" never mentioned using hounds was acceptable.

stevoman

Bendihorse wrote: »

There is a food chain for a reason, without that the whole balance of ecology in the world would be upset. Anyone that claims to be an 'animal lover' should understand this.

Humans are at the top, we chase and kill those things lower than us on the chain, as does every carnivorous animal right down along that chain to herbivores (Who also get hunted and chased by animals in the wild). I guess its some form of instinct that’s in us. Media and misinformation has succeeded in abating this in some folk, if that’s how they choose to live and be, then I'm guessing that they don’t wear leather shoes or eat meat, right??

I would also like to define the word 'wild natural habitat' here, that being the plains of Africa and broad masses of land that remain relatively untouched and un-interfered with by humans. The food chain there still works. Unfortunately some animals have been poached to extinction but there is still a natural predator present for every animal in the form of the Great Lion.
Varying levels of human intervention here and agriculture mean that the natural ecologic system in Ireland has been unbalanced and the natural predator of the fox has been removed.

While the fox is still vermin, they should be hunted in whatever fashion is needed to keep them under control. The number of foxes in the wild is currently 'controllable' (although I know I have seen many more about in the past few years than I can remember in a while) they are not on an endangered species list and are therefore fair game to stalked and hunted the same way as they do to their prey.

Any animal that eats meat has to hunt and chase to kill. Therefore animals hunt chase kill and 'terrorise' just like humans do. It’s the circle of life.

Quite frankly that’s all I have to say on the matter because I am sick trying to explain this to people that have their minds made up about something based on films on youtube, photos in the paper, grossly inflated and somewhat fabricated stories from Anti organisations.

If you ask someone in the morning who has no real knowledge of hunting if they thing it should be banned, then 99% of them will say ‘Yes’ as they don’t know enough about it themselves to make an informed decision so its safer to say that it should be banned.

If you want to understand something and have an opinion on it then go out there and experience it yourself. People that are misinformed should not be asked to vote on something that they know nothing about. That’s not democracy, that’s like giving a child a gun to play with.

very well said. fair play.

Bendihorse

peasant wrote: »

just as an aside ...the damage a cat can do can easily be minimised by keeping it inside during the night and dusk & dawn

Oh? And prevent if from realising its internal carnal instincts? Surely this is cruelty of another form? Being hunted is a natural thing to happen to an animal, being held captive indoors for the night so as to prevent it from realising an instinct as nature intended is not.

Vegeta

cowzerp wrote: »

Not true, the goat was killed instant and did not even no about it, the crossbow was as powerful as a rifle.

Sorry that's just not true

Also if your lungs and heart are pierced by anything you cant speak as you need air in you lungs to speak, sing talk

Get someone to hold your throat (carefully) and see if you can speak. I tell the truth

So even if the goat was in agony a lung heart shot it could not call out.

Whispered

Bendihorse wrote: »

Oh? And prevent if from realising its internal carnal instincts? Surely this is cruelty of another form? Being hunted is a natural thing to happen to an animal, being held captive indoors for the night so it cant hunt and kill as nature intended is not.

LOL if my cats were left out overnight they would probably be baying for my blood! Most cats prefer to sleep indoors and are no more held captive than I am when I'm in bed!

cowzerp

Bendihorse wrote: »

There is a food chain for a reason, without that the whole balance of ecology in the world would be upset. Anyone that claims to be an 'animal lover' should understand this.

Humans are at the top, we chase and kill those things lower than us on the chain, as does every carnivorous animal right down along that chain to herbivores (Who also get hunted and chased by animals in the wild). I guess its some form of instinct that’s in us. Media and misinformation has succeeded in abating this in some folk, if that’s how they choose to live and be, then I'm guessing that they don’t wear leather shoes or eat meat, right??

I would also like to define the word 'wild natural habitat' here, that being the plains of Africa and broad masses of land that remain relatively untouched and un-interfered with by humans. The food chain there still works. Unfortunately some animals have been poached to extinction but there is still a natural predator present for every animal in the form of the Great Lion.
Varying levels of human intervention here and agriculture mean that the natural ecologic system in Ireland has been unbalanced and the natural predator of the fox has been removed.

While the fox is still vermin, they should be hunted in whatever fashion is needed to keep them under control. The number of foxes in the wild is currently 'controllable' (although I know I have seen many more about in the past few years than I can remember in a while) they are not on an endangered species list and are therefore fair game to stalked and hunted the same way as they do to their prey.

Any animal that eats meat has to hunt and chase to kill. Therefore animals hunt chase kill and 'terrorise' just like humans do. It’s the circle of life.

Quite frankly that’s all I have to say on the matter because I am sick trying to explain this to people that have their minds made up about something based on films on youtube, photos in the paper, grossly inflated and somewhat fabricated stories from Anti organisations.

If you ask someone in the morning who has no real knowledge of hunting if they thing it should be banned, then 99% of them will say ‘Yes’ as they don’t know enough about it themselves to make an informed decision so its safer to say that it should be banned.

If you want to understand something and have an opinion on it then go out there and experience it yourself. People that are misinformed should not be asked to vote on something that they know nothing about. That’s not democracy, that’s like giving a child a gun to play with.

Total crap, humans hunting foxes is not natural, by your way of talking we should just kill everything in the wild because there below us, hunting for food is natural, hunting for a warm coat was natural, hunting for fun shows the evil vindictive part of human nature, this ranks with dog fighting, bear baiting, badger baiting and cock fighting..

Vegeta

cowzerp wrote: »

If they where wild dogs chasing a fox i'd say it was natural, been bred for this purpose and lead by snobs is not, so the answer is yes it does change from natural to un natural..anyway fox is not a natural prey for dogs anyway, rabbits, birds, lambs etc would be..

The fox is natural prey for larger members of the Canidae family.

Also the hounds will generally lead once they pick up the scent