Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Misc] Fox hunting banned on National Trust land
- Thread starter Questions
- Start date
- Jul 10, 2003
- 25,809
About f***ing time[MENTION=1517]junior[/MENTION] ?
One of the main reasons I voted for Blair in 1997 (Des Turner) was the promise to ban fox hunting.
Then he disgustingly watered it down by allowing Trail Hunting = open house for countryside thugs and their wnkish toff bosses to de facto carry on as before. Out of sight, with biased rural plod on their side.
Scum of the earth.
Well done NT.
Then he disgustingly watered it down by allowing Trail Hunting = open house for countryside thugs and their wnkish toff bosses to de facto carry on as before. Out of sight, with biased rural plod on their side.
Scum of the earth.
Well done NT.
I thought fox hunting was made illegal during Blair's time. Which tory brought it back?
Posh Tony let the Countryside Alliance (thugs) off.
https://www.gov.uk/hunting/mammals
It’s illegal to hunt foxes with a pack of dogs. You can use dogs to simulate hunting, for example ‘drag’ or ‘trail’ hunting.
You can use up to 2 dogs to chase (‘flush’ or ‘stalk’) foxes out of hiding if the fox is causing damage to your property or the environment.
Your dogs can’t go underground to find the foxes unless they’re threatening wild or game birds kept for shooting - only one dog can go underground at any time.
You must:
shoot the fox quickly after it’s been found
carry proof you own the land you’re shooting on or written permission from the landowner
I see. Strictly speaking a fox hunt is illegal. But you can dress up like a fox hunter with dogs as long as you don't hunt a fox. If you come across a fox you can only kill it if it has been naughty. And only one of your dogs is allowed to chase it (but not catch it). Then the fox must be shot. And this all has to be observed and recorded by a local policeman. Ideally if he's the master of hounds.
Was this all necessary to stop the Countryside Alliance from blockading our rural roads, in a style not dissimilar to that of Insulate Britain protesters? Albeit back then with the full support of the Mail, Express and Boris?
Politics is the art of the possible and the nation was not in the mood in the 90s to tell honest country folk what to do. So it seems....I suspect the tide continues to turn. . . . .
- Jul 10, 2003
- 25,809
Back in the days when I was a testosterone fuelled teenager I met a number of [MENTION=21158]Weststander[/MENTION]s 'countryside thugs', I found that even when you were morally. legally and physically abled to prove what was 'right', when you were up against the Duke of Beaufort and Princess Anne the local police would only go one way.
It may have been one of the many reasons I took a step back, a deep breath and realised there may be many ways of trying to achieve what is morally right. And, apparently 40 odd years later, we got there on this one
Last edited:
lawros left foot
Glory hunting since 1969
Great news about the National Trust, however, it has to be confirmed by their board of Trustees.
In rather more disappointing news, the Ministry of Defence has granted 11 new licenses for trail hunts to use our ( MOD) land. This brings the total of licences issued to 76 .
Are Sabs allowed to monitor Hunts on MOD land?
If not, how many more times will these bloodthirsty sadists be able to break the law with complete impunity.
In rather more disappointing news, the Ministry of Defence has granted 11 new licenses for trail hunts to use our ( MOD) land. This brings the total of licences issued to 76 .
Are Sabs allowed to monitor Hunts on MOD land?
If not, how many more times will these bloodthirsty sadists be able to break the law with complete impunity.
Back in the days when I was a testosterone fuelled teenager I met a number of [MENTION=21158]Weststander[/MENTION]s 'countryside thugs', I found that even when you were morally. legally and physically abled to prove what was 'right', when you were up against the Duke of Beaufort and Princess Anne the local police would only go one way.
It may have been one of the many reasons I took a step back, a deep breath and realised there may be many ways of trying to achieve what is morally right. And, apparently 40 odd years later, we got there on this one
Quite.
People like one of my brothers hates Blair more than any politician - for betraying socialism. And yet without Blair, Starmer would have no hope. He still has to scrub out the stain of Corbyn, of course.
Having all the right policies is not enough. There has to be compromise with the electorate while maintaining a stance where possible. Back in the 90s, banning foxhunting was seen by those who read the Sun, Mail, Express, and, Telegraph as a 'distraction' at best, and 'gesture politics', 'Taking their eye off the ball' and 'pandering to yoghurt knitters and the likes of Swampy' in the minds of many.
The art of the possible....
I’ve had diplomatic (both parties) debates with folk from places like Crowborough, who have zero interest themselves in stuff like hare coarsing, fox hunting or badger baiting, but who unmovingly believe all should be legal.
The only two reasons I ever heard, were:
1. Controlling excess numbers; and
2. You townies should keep your nose out of rural matters.
Fck off. My current home address has no bearing on my passion for wildlife. If animals definitely need culling, fine, but do it legally, humanely, under some sort of supervision.
Scummers with blood lust are sick f@ckers.
The only two reasons I ever heard, were:
1. Controlling excess numbers; and
2. You townies should keep your nose out of rural matters.
Fck off. My current home address has no bearing on my passion for wildlife. If animals definitely need culling, fine, but do it legally, humanely, under some sort of supervision.
Scummers with blood lust are sick f@ckers.
ATFC Seagull
Aberystwyth Town FC
Genuine question: Whilst I have no time, sympathy or anything in common with people who hunt, allowing them to ride through the countryside dressed up on their horses chasing trails and not killing foxes seems like a good compromise. Why is it impossible to police this? Why can't they just prosecute the people who are using it as a smokescreen for hunting?
lawros left foot
Glory hunting since 1969
Because the law was written up with a lot of grey areas. It should have just banned hunting with dogs in it’s entirety, instead it left a huge amount of wriggle room for the perverts to keep using hounds to tear other creatures to pieces.
If hunting was a working class sport, like Cock fighting, badger baiting, and dog fighting it would have been banned at the same time they were.
Return of the Rev
Well-known member
Brilliant, glad I voted
vegster
Sanity Clause
- May 5, 2008
- 27,892
I remember that one of the arguments (excuses) put forward for keeping fox hunting was the fact that the hunts would have to have all their hounds put down as they would be impossible to re-home. ... oh, and that that would be cruel to the dogs !
ATFC Seagull
Aberystwyth Town FC
Ok, I guess that makes sense. As I've said, I've no sympathy for them at all.
I think my concern is that the National Trust is now being dragged into being yet another new front in these ever-expanding culture wars. If I was overthinking it I might feel that this what the government would like to see rather than ensure the laws are enforced themselves.
lawros left foot
Glory hunting since 1969
Another really convincing argument put forward at the time that Parliament was debating the hunting ban, was that hunting was needed to keep down the numbers of foxes in the country side. Without them being torn apart by packs of hounds they would overrun every henhouse, sheep farm and commercial shoot .
When it was suggested that if numbers needed to be culled, that it should be carried out humanely, the hunting fraternity proclaimed that actually they didn’t kill many foxes anyway, hardly enough to notice. The majority of hunts didn’t kill any foxes most times they rode out.
Creaky
Well-known member
Same argument put forward by those supporting horse and dog racing.
Wardy's twin
Well-known member
- Oct 21, 2014
- 8,434
What tipped the national trust was not Chris Packham but the fact that a hunting saboteur hijacked a zoom meeting and recorded it. The hunt leaders on the call admitted that trail hunting was a sham so they could kill foxes . They also discussed all the tricks used to deceive the police about what they were up to. Not sure if people are aware but this is the second vote on this, the previous one about 3-4 years ago failed even though the majority of people voted against it but the chairman of the NT board conjured up 4000 proxy votes to over turn the decision. One hunt was seen on national trust land today , they don't give a f*ck about the law or what other people think.
Hunting continued after 2004 because many very powerful and wealthy tories support it and they control the local police( e. g. Rees-Mogg wife is/was chair of a hunt as is Soames and Boris found it sexually arousing ). The police are often involved and its clear whose side they are on. Now people might say well it has to be saboteurs who are a problem - great unwashed and soap dodgers tresspassing etc looking for fights. Most saboteurs are pacifists and funnily enough are trying to ensure a law is followed. There are also hunt monitors who are completely separate to the saboteurs - often middle aged and older, often women who go to maintain the law and keep within the law. Both groups have to put up with all sorts of abuse, intimidation and the occasion attack , if the same actions were carried out at a football ground the perpetrators of the attacks would be arrested.
One clear example of the bias from the police is that people who do hare coursing are arrested by police , why because they are usually either travellers or low working class. Note I agree they should arrest them but they need to do that against fox hunters.
Hunting continued after 2004 because many very powerful and wealthy tories support it and they control the local police( e. g. Rees-Mogg wife is/was chair of a hunt as is Soames and Boris found it sexually arousing ). The police are often involved and its clear whose side they are on. Now people might say well it has to be saboteurs who are a problem - great unwashed and soap dodgers tresspassing etc looking for fights. Most saboteurs are pacifists and funnily enough are trying to ensure a law is followed. There are also hunt monitors who are completely separate to the saboteurs - often middle aged and older, often women who go to maintain the law and keep within the law. Both groups have to put up with all sorts of abuse, intimidation and the occasion attack , if the same actions were carried out at a football ground the perpetrators of the attacks would be arrested.
One clear example of the bias from the police is that people who do hare coursing are arrested by police , why because they are usually either travellers or low working class. Note I agree they should arrest them but they need to do that against fox hunters.
clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,310
I was (am still) pretty agnostic to the subject, feeling it was mildly hypocritical to eat meat and be worried about fox hunting.
However, the fox hunting "industry", well let's call it out for what it is a "sport" has never been particularly forthcoming about the other animals involved.
It does little or nothing to control the fox population, they rarely catch one but blimey they don't half get through some dogs.
"Putting down the dogs" was a disingenuous excuse. They put them down anyway in their thousands at approximately half their natural lifespan.
Any different from the male cattle and poultry that are systematically destroyed in pursuit of milk and eggs ?
Not really, but you don't hear a farmer saying if we become vegan, thousands of animals will be put to death because they can't be re-homed.