Ban on Fox Hunting

John_Rambo

Bendihorse wrote: »

You are an extremely condscending individual

EGAR agrees with the controlling of fox population, she said it in an earlierpost, that's why she asked you to read back on the posts which you obviously didn't, now you look like a dckhead.

red 21

Stag hunting and fox hunting is a very old tradition, but it should be banned. Enda Kenny has said he will bring back the Stag hunting which a disgrace it is not like our country is been over run by them. Fox hunting is stupid as you cant eat a fox it is an utter disgrace that in this day and age we still cant have any sort of realistic approach on hunting or any animal cruelty. If you lived next door to a person who kept children locked in cages and breed them to the way 'society' wanted them. Would you turn a blind eye to it and think ' i'm sure somebody else will report it'. I understand that some people do see hunting as a sport, but what satisfaction can a person get from it? As it stands nearly all birds are protected, only 22 other animal species are protected, while 86 plant species are. I do not understand the concept of keeping such plants when the life that needs them plants i.e for shelter are able to be slaughtered just for fun.

endasmail

Yes

Population control is the weakest argument possible when trying to argue the pros of hunts.
Any farmer I know refuses point blank to have a hunt on their land. It unsettles their own animals too much. It can lead to cattle breaking out. And it can leave cattle jittery for days on end.
I also know farmers that will participate in hunts but refuse to have a hunt on their own land for the reasons I outlined above.[/QUOTE]

you obviously dont no what your talking about
seen as this kind of hunting takes place through winter
when cattle are in sheds
your whole comment is a contradiction

Shanao

endasmail wrote: »

you obviously dont no what your talking about
seen as this kind of hunting takes place through winter
when cattle are in sheds
your whole comment is a contradiction

Not really. We have sheep and cattle farmers in the family who absolutely refuse hunts on their land because
1. their cattle are only in sheds in extreme weather conditions so no, not all cattle are in sheds over winter and can break out when unsettled.
2.Sheep are very rarely put into sheds and they can break out. (should be will, I'm sick of chasing sheep around the hilltops after dogs have been at them!!)
3.Hunting dogs have actually killed some of their sheep and lambs and have been PTS
And 4. They have never lost an animal to a fox, so they are more than happy to have them on their land. Crows and stray dogs do more damage to flocks than foxes.

Not to mention that the hunts are on around their place in autumn as well as winter.

EGAR

Cattle at least around here are out 365 days a year. Not one farmer around here put their cattle in sheds for the winter, not even the weanlings. They fodder them in the field in round feeders which is why you see so many of these contraptions in the fields in the winter - in case you were wondering .

endasmail

Yes

ye two posters must have been in the caribbean the last few winters

the cattle around hear were in sheds

endasmail

Yes

EGAR wrote: »

Cattle at least around here are out 365 days a year. Not one farmer around here put their cattle in sheds for the winter, not even the weanlings. They fodder them in the field in round feeders which is why you see so many of these contraptions in the fields in the winter - in case you were wondering .

i wasnt

Shanao

Nope, there's a recession on you know? Cant afford things like that.
Obviously you just cant accept it when someone speaks the truth and ruins your argument. And do you really think all farmers have room for all of their cattle in sheds? If you do, then you've obviously never been on a farm. Cattle who have hoof injuries or leg problems cant be on slats anyway so they would have to be outside, and there was plenty of farmers with their cattle outside. You must have missed all those reports on the news of farmers bringing tankards of water up the fields to their cattle in the snow.

EGAR

?????

Can't accept the truth?

Or perhaps the farmers around here have been feeding Faerie cattle all those months..?

ISDW

There are cattle in the fields here all year round. A local farmer comes to see his cattle every day in the fields next to and behind my house, and I mean every day, Christmas day, New Years day, the wettest, coldest winters day, the cattle are outside.

He has water from my land for his cattle, and it is only turned off during the summer, when he grows the land to turn into silage for the winter.

endasmail

Yes

Shanao wrote: »

Nope, there's a recession on you know? Cant afford things like that.
Obviously you just cant accept it when someone speaks the truth and ruins your argument. And do you really think all farmers have room for all of their cattle in sheds? If you do, then you've obviously never been on a farm. Cattle who have hoof injuries or leg problems cant be on slats anyway so they would have to be outside, and there was plenty of farmers with their cattle outside. You must have missed all those reports on the news of farmers bringing tankards of water up the fields to their cattle in the snow.

yea,cant accept the truth:cool:

i just wanted to clear up the over exaggerating going on in this thread

fits

Yes

There is stock out all year round in most parts of the country. It would be silly to deny that!

Some farmers are happy for the hunts to cross the land and some arent. Its up to the hunts to maintain good relationships and behave responsibly.

To say they can ride roughshod over people and get away with it these days is not correct.

John_Rambo

Vegeta wrote: »

People who deal with pets and domesticated animals trying to dictate policy for WILD animals.

You're right EGAR, same old, same old.

In fairness Vegeta, you have just described most hunstmen, huntswomen, hunters, farmers, RISE members etc... You're comment could lead one to believe you are in favour of a body to look after all of the development of our wildlife, professional marksmen and women with proper wildlife college training instead of random people wandering around the countryside taking it upon themselves to regulate our wildlife! :eek:

EGAR

Now, I am coming from a country much bigger than Ireland (although this isn't hard to achieve ) where there are Foerster (Rangers?) who know exactly what wildlife is in their corner of the forest, they know each doe and stag and know which one is too old, wont survive the next winter etc. They also know where birds of prey nest and each badger set, how many wild boars etc.

Hunters have to go through rigorous and strict training, same goes for their dogs. They have to pass many a training days before they are let lose on the wildlife population.

I think this is the only way forward in the future and it would prevent rogue hunters (had them on my land uninvited (pheasants) and had them shoot magpies from the road on my land etc), found many a deer dead or half dead in the forest with the churned up ground beneath them testimony of the death struggle. Shot in the lungs, shot in the leg..

As I said earlier in this thread, I have no problem with hunting if it's done properly and the people doing it are properly trained. Dogs should be trained to follow a scent to find a wounded animal to put it out of its misery.

What I have seen so far in my pocket of the world shows me this is mostly not the case and tbh it sickens me. Every time I take my horse out for a spin in the forest I know I could come across this and trust me, it's not fun.

Because I mostly care for domestic animals does not automatically exclude a concern for wildlife .

Every sentient being has the right to a quick death.

homerhop

Yes

I cant think of anyone I have hunted with who does not want to see a quick and clean kill. I have had arguements with lads i have seen acting to bollix, as it is their kind of actions that are used to show those who hunt in a bad light. No more than the trouble you have to deal with every day because a dog is a registered breed, just look at how you were treated at the agility class by those who see themselves as responsible pet owners and dog lovers.
There are and always will be those in every aspect of society who dont care about anything as long as do things their way and it reflects on us all. We can go around in circles here for the rest of our lives hunters this , pet owners that. It doesnt achieve anything.

EGAR

Homerhop, but that is just the point I was trying to make: it isn't mutually exclusive.

Discodog

homerhop wrote: »

I cant think of anyone I have hunted with who does not want to see a quick and clean kill.

Then you & they must oppose hunting with Hounds. Chasing an animal for miles & then tearing it to bits is not a clean, quick kill.

The old self regulation, leave to us, you know nothing argument keeps cropping up. The Wildlife of Ireland is a concern for everyone whether they live in the City or Country. It's the old RISE ( where are they now ) argument that townies should not interfere.

There is an incredible arrogance that the hunters are the only people with any knowledge of our Wildlife. That people who keep domestic pets & do not hunt should not have a voice or an opinion. It is the same with the Greyhound lobby.

Surely the one thing that the past few years have taught us is that self regulation never works.

Egar is right in that if shooting is required it should be carried out by a licensed operator who has proved his competence & carries the relevant qualifications & insurance.

homerhop

Yes

The Wildlife of Ireland is a concern for everyone whether they live in the City or Country.

Please show me where I said it didnt, but i would like to bet a small wager that if you went into some of the schools in town and asked the students to name a few wild species of birds etc they would find it hard to, unless it is comes attached to hanna montanna or an xbox they wont know. I think the knowledge of wildlife in this country is going down to the same level as that country you love to show as a shining light in all things animal related.

There is an incredible arrogance that the hunters are the only people with any knowledge of our Wildlife

No worse than your arrogance that those who hunt do not care for wildlife or their dogs.

if shooting is required it should be carried out by a licensed operator who has proved his competence & carries the relevant qualifications & insurance

I have a license, in fact I have 3. I have an insurance that the land owner, their property and livestock is covered, as well as a personal insurance. I have completed safety courses along with a few others. I hope you apply the same logic when it comes to pet ownership, there are plenty of pet owners out there you wouldnt give a boiled egg to mind let alone a living creature. How many people head across land with their dogs and have no insurance, how good does yours cover you and any farmer who has given you permission to walk their land?

Discodog

homerhop wrote: »

Please show me where I said it didnt, but i would like to bet a small wager that if you went into some of the schools in town and asked the students to name a few wild species of birds etc they would find it hard to, unless it is comes attached to hanna montanna or an xbox they wont know. I think the knowledge of wildlife in this country is going down to the same level as that country you love to show as a shining light in all things animal related.


No worse than your arrogance that those who hunt do not care for wildlife or their dogs.


I have a license, in fact I have 3. I have an insurance that the land owner, their property and livestock, as well as a personal insurance. I have completed safety courses along with a few others. I hope you apply the same logic when it comes to pet ownership. How many people head across land with their dogs and have no insurance, how good does yours cover you and any farmer who has given you permission to walk their land?

I would of thought that it was clear that not all of my last post was directed at you. But you have not addressed the point that was, which is the conflict between a clean kill & hunting with hounds.

There is a world of difference between a walker & a man carrying/using a lethal weapon. When I & I suspect EGAR, refer to licenses we don't mean a gun license but a license of competence.

No one should be allowed to use a gun, other than on a range, until they have proved their knowledge & ability including being a good shot. They should have to pass a test before being granted a license of competence to shoot.

I do not suggest that people who hunt do not care for their animals or for wildlife. After all they need wildlife to shoot so they have a vested interest in it. But the idea that they are performing some kind of service & that we would be knee deep in wildlife if they didn't shoot is is ridiculous.

flutered

Yes

hunting in one form and another has been around since time immorial, it is only in the past 10-15 years that is has become popular to bash it, very few foxes are killed, most are only hunted from one townsland to the other, any that are killed by the hunt are always the sick and the hurt, has anyone heard domestic dogs for a few night after a hunt, they are constantly barking at foxes returning to their homeground, foxes from a particular area when hunted take a particular route, fox hounds are not trained to kill they are trained to follow a scent, i must assume until proven otherwise that my 2 cents worth will be villified on this thread.

Discodog

flutered wrote: »

hunting in one form and another has been around since time immorial, it is only in the past 10-15 years that is has become popular to bash it, very few foxes are killed,

are not trained to kill they are trained to follow a scent, i must assume until proven otherwise that my 2 cents worth will be villified on this thread.

So has Bear baiting, Cock fighting, Dog fighting, etc etc. People were opposing fox hunting long ago in the UK.

Hounds may not be trained to kill but they do kill.

Any vilification here is no different to that given to one of us posting in the hunting forum.

homerhop

Yes

I would of thought that it was clear that not all of my last post was directed at you. But you have not addressed the point that was, which is the conflict between a clean kill & hunting with hounds.?

Did you not read my previous post that stated I prefer a clean kill?

There is a world of difference between a walker & a man carrying/using a lethal weapon.

Man/woman in this day of equality. Are you saying people walking their dogs on other peoples lands should not have personal insurance?
So would you agree that people looking to keep pets should pass a mandatory course and inspection?

When I & I suspect EGAR, refer to licenses we don't mean a gun license but a license of competence.

Anyone applying for a first license has to have a course done. As I already stated I have a few done.

No one should be allowed to use a gun, other than on a range, until they have proved their knowledge & ability including being a good shot. They should have to pass a test before being granted a license of competence to shoot.

I would have no objections to this at all.

I do not suggest that people who hunt do not care for their animals or for wildlife

.
I shall be sure to quote you on this in future posts.

Leopardi

Behind all the rhetoric about "tradition" and "pest control," those who hunt are driven by a barbaric blood-lust which is impervious to rational argument. This type of depraved behaviour should be seen for what it is.

EGAR

Anyone applying for a first license has to have a course done. As I already stated I have a few done.

It's a competency course as far as I know which deals solely with the handling of the weapon?

None of the guys here did such a course and many had the shotgun etc handed down from their fathers. My ex-OH never did such a course for example and holds a shotgun licence for years, he isn't even a member of a gun club.

homerhop

Yes

Leopardi wrote: »

Behind all the rhetoric about "tradition" and "pest control," those who hunt are driven by a barbaric blood-lust which is impervious to rational argument. This type of depraved behaviour should be seen for what it is.

So nice of you to show a rational arguement in your post :rolleyes:

Hellrazer

Leopardi wrote: »

Behind all the rhetoric about "tradition" and "pest control," those who hunt are driven by a barbaric blood-lust which is impervious to rational argument. This type of depraved behaviour should be seen for what it is.

This type of response does nothing for the debate so calm it down.

Consider this a warning.

homerhop

Yes

EGAR wrote: »

It's a competency course as far as I know which deals solely with the handling of the weapon?

None of the guys here did such a course and many had the shotgun etc handed down from their fathers. My ex-OH never did such a course for example and holds a shotgun licence for years, he isn't even a member of a gun club.

It covers handling and safety in general. It may not be up to German standards but it is a start in the right direction you must agree. All members be they new or old have to have it done to be a member of the club I am in.

EGAR

Well, ex-OH isn't, and he was moaning about having to get a gunlock etc last time it was renewed (last year sometime).

Handling the gun is one thing but what I like to see included in the course is information on wildlife. You would be surprised how many people haven't got a clue when it comes to that. What's protected, what isn't, when it's allowed to hunt what and why.

I can shoot at the bullseye no bother, however, I would not know where to aim at on a deer to kill it quickly. You get my point?

the_syco

Yes

Worztron wrote: »

I find the "sport" of fox hunting to be utterly deplorable. I'd like it to be completely banned.

Is the poll about the "sport" of fox hunting, or actual fox hunting? One involves horses and dogs, and one involves a quick kill.

EGAR

I presumed and based my vote on hunting foxes with hounds and horses.