Tories want fox hunting back

N&P: Discuss governments, nations, politics and recent related news here.

Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, Edi, K. A. Pital

Fox Hunting - yay or nay?

Yes
8
21%
No
31
79%
 
Total votes: 39

User avatar
darth_timon
Padawan Learner
Posts: 262
Joined: 2007-05-18 04:00pm
Location: UK
Contact:

Tories want fox hunting back

Post by darth_timon »

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 91571.html

The Conservatives will hold a parliamentary vote on repealing the fox hunting ban if they win the next election, David Cameron has said.

The Prime Minister, who has previously ridden with the Heythrop Hunt in Oxfordshire, said he believed in the “freedom to hunt” and wanted fox hunting legalised.

Writing in the Countryside Alliance magazine, he criticised widespread negative attitudes to the illegal animal killings.

“There is definitely a rural way of life which a born and bred Londoner might struggle to understand," he wrote.

“I have always been a strong supporter of country sports. It is my firm belief that people should have the freedom to hunt, so I share the frustration that many people feel about the Hunting Act and the way it was brought in by the last government
This might be relatively old news, but it's getting more attention again now the election is over and the Tories look set to push this. The SNP are on record as saying they'll oppose an attempt to repeal the ban.

It's a relatively small issue amongst the backdrop of economic and social concerns, but popular opinion is against fox hunting here in the UK, so it would be quite telling if the Tories tried to bring it back, despite public opinion.

It should be noted that I am not against population control for foxes, especially in urban areas. They can be dangerous - and they carry disease - but fox hunting is dressed up as a sport - it's not. Sport implies competition - there is nothing competitive about a fox being chased by dozens of men on horseback and packs of dogs. I rant about this a bit more on my site: http://wp.me/p4V4lR-ll
User avatar
salm
Rabid Monkey
Posts: 10296
Joined: 2002-09-09 08:25pm

Re: Tories want fox hunting back

Post by salm »

darth_timon wrote: They can be dangerous
Lolwut?
User avatar
madd0ct0r
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 6259
Joined: 2008-03-14 07:47am

Re: Tories want fox hunting back

Post by madd0ct0r »

salm wrote:
darth_timon wrote: They can be dangerous
Lolwut?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-21406854
"Aid, trade, green technology and peace." - Hans Rosling.
"Welcome to SDN, where we can't see the forest because walking into trees repeatedly feels good, bro." - Mr Coffee
User avatar
salm
Rabid Monkey
Posts: 10296
Joined: 2002-09-09 08:25pm

Re: Tories want fox hunting back

Post by salm »

Ah, so they´re like cats.
Simon_Jester
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 30165
Joined: 2009-05-23 07:29pm

Re: Tories want fox hunting back

Post by Simon_Jester »

Fox hunting is a sport, but it is not a fair competition between the hunter(s) and the fox.

The same is true of all forms of hunting: they are sporting activities which require various athletic skills, knowledge of wilderness terrain, and so on. But they are not fair- because humans have intelligence and tool use, and the animals don't.

I mean, target shooting isn't fair from the point of view of the inanimate target (which gets shot full of bullets) compared to the marksman (which doesn't). Horse racing isn't fair from the point of view of the horses (who get to run themselves into exhaustion) compared to the jockies (who don't, and who get a considerable share of the social credit and benefits of winning).
This space dedicated to Vasily Arkhipov
Patroklos
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2577
Joined: 2009-04-14 11:00am

Re: Tories want fox hunting back

Post by Patroklos »

I see nothing different between this and taking an hour to hand reel in a marlin or tuna while sport fishing. And just like fox hunting that requires non competitive advantages like rods and reals, bait and power boats. Unlike fox hunting instead of just being chased/fought to exhaustion (and usually NOT killed) the fish has a giant hook in its mouth that a multi hundred horse power boat and thousand dollar reel are adding pressure to.

This all comes down to whether we think a fox is a sufficiently intelligent or aware animal that hunting should be banned on humanitarian grounds. If they are like dolphins fine. If they are like raccoons then let them be hunted. In the end most of the outrage over this and why its actually banned right now is rich white people enjoyed participating in it. Which is stupid because running down animals with hounds is more often how poor people hunt, as an raccoon or possum hunter will tell you. And fox, actually, as its a common sport for decidedly not rich rural farmers as well.

It should be noted that the law in question does not ban just fox hunting, but all hunting via dogs with a few niche exceptions.
User avatar
Thanas
Magister
Magister
Posts: 30779
Joined: 2004-06-26 07:49pm

Re: Tories want fox hunting back

Post by Thanas »

I don't see much use in hunting the fox like aristocrats used to do, just shoot the animal if it is necessary. Hunting for the sake of sport is morally wrong IMO, as is any harm done to animals for sport (that includes fishing). Sustenance and industrial production are valid reasons, hurting animals because one needs to get his jollies is not IMO.
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------
My LPs
User avatar
Elheru Aran
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 13073
Joined: 2004-03-04 01:15am
Location: Georgia

Re: Tories want fox hunting back

Post by Elheru Aran »

Thanas wrote:I don't see much use in hunting the fox like aristocrats used to do, just shoot the animal if it is necessary. Hunting for the sake of sport is morally wrong IMO, as is any harm done to animals for sport (that includes fishing). Sustenance and industrial production are valid reasons, hurting animals because one needs to get his jollies is not IMO.
This essentially sums it up. We would consider it abuse to run after a dog with cars, harrying it to almost the point of death, and then kicking it about a bit before letting it go. Fox-hunting with horses, even if the fox is not killed, is little different. If the fox is eating someone's chickens? Shoot the damn critter. If it's not? Just let it be. Fishing to put some fish in the pot (or the freezer as the case may be)? Sure. Fishing to get pretty pictures of you holding a big fish before you toss it back in the water? Not so much.
It's a strange world. Let's keep it that way.
User avatar
Vendetta
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 10895
Joined: 2002-07-07 04:57pm
Location: Sheffield, UK

Re: Tories want fox hunting back

Post by Vendetta »

If fox hunting were the preserve of hoodie wearing youths on quad bikes and packs of staffies and pit bulls, the tories would be all for banning it.

They only want it back because it's a pursuit for rich people.
Titan Uranus
Padawan Learner
Posts: 209
Joined: 2013-05-02 01:12am

Re: Tories want fox hunting back

Post by Titan Uranus »

Isn't the red fox a pest species in the UK the way raccoons are in America?
User avatar
Vendetta
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 10895
Joined: 2002-07-07 04:57pm
Location: Sheffield, UK

Re: Tories want fox hunting back

Post by Vendetta »

Titan Uranus wrote:Isn't the red fox a pest species in the UK the way raccoons are in America?
Sort of, but only really of interest to farmers (who shoot them because it's somewhat inefficient to use fifty dogs and a herd of twats on horses to deal with one fox at a time).
User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 21559
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Tories want fox hunting back

Post by The Romulan Republic »

I don't think tradition, or one more way for the British aristocracy to entertain themselves, is worth the pain to foxes. Keep the ban.
User avatar
Broomstick
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 28846
Joined: 2004-01-02 07:04pm
Location: Industrial armpit of the US Midwest

Re: Tories want fox hunting back

Post by Broomstick »

Simon_Jester wrote:Fox hunting is a sport, but it is not a fair competition between the hunter(s) and the fox.

The same is true of all forms of hunting: they are sporting activities which require various athletic skills, knowledge of wilderness terrain, and so on. But they are not fair- because humans have intelligence and tool use, and the animals don't.
Different forms of hunting have different levels of fairness. US style bow and rifle hunting after deer is "fair" in that no hunter is guaranteed a kill, in fact, quite a few hunters I know get a deer 50% or less of the time. It's not fair because humans are more intelligent, have fire arms, and engage in a variety of strategies to get deer, it's not a wholesale slaughter.

That's different than a fox hunt, or shooting animals from a helicopter, or various other options that are frequently outlawed because, as we have learned from history, there is a difference between hunting and wholesale extermination.

Let's face it, an English fox hunt is NOT an efficient way to kill a fox. If it was really about population control they'd be using traps, or some more stealthy technique than tearing across the countryside with packs of dogs and herds of horses.
. Horse racing isn't fair from the point of view of the horses (who get to run themselves into exhaustion) compared to the jockies (who don't, and who get a considerable share of the social credit and benefits of winning).
Well... except horses run anyway, and the winners get the right to breed which any self-respecting stallion understands on some level. Mostly "ooo - I get to massage my pee-pee in a mare!" but hey, it's a horse. Wild stallions fight each other for breeding rights, racing stallions run for them.

(Yes, some racehorses are mares but most are stallions)
A life is like a garden. Perfect moments can be had, but not preserved, except in memory. Leonard Nimoy.

Now I did a job. I got nothing but trouble since I did it, not to mention more than a few unkind words as regard to my character so let me make this abundantly clear. I do the job. And then I get paid.- Malcolm Reynolds, Captain of Serenity, which sums up my feelings regarding the lawsuit discussed here.

If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich. - John F. Kennedy

Sam Vimes Theory of Economic Injustice
User avatar
Zaune
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7540
Joined: 2010-06-21 11:05am
Location: In Transit
Contact:

Re: Tories want fox hunting back

Post by Zaune »

Thanas wrote:I don't see much use in hunting the fox like aristocrats used to do, just shoot the animal if it is necessary. Hunting for the sake of sport is morally wrong IMO, as is any harm done to animals for sport (that includes fishing). Sustenance and industrial production are valid reasons, hurting animals because one needs to get his jollies is not IMO.
There's not much use in hunting anything in this country, to be honest. Just look at how we hunt game birds; we have to outright farm the bloody things so there's enough to be worth shooting.
There are hardly any excesses of the most crazed psychopath that cannot easily be duplicated by a normal kindly family man who just comes in to work every day and has a job to do.
-- (Terry Pratchett, Small Gods)


Replace "ginger" with "n*gger," and suddenly it become a lot less funny, doesn't it?
-- fgalkin


Like my writing? Tip me on Patreon

I Have A Blog
User avatar
Broomstick
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 28846
Joined: 2004-01-02 07:04pm
Location: Industrial armpit of the US Midwest

Re: Tories want fox hunting back

Post by Broomstick »

Thanas wrote:I don't see much use in hunting the fox like aristocrats used to do, just shoot the animal if it is necessary.
Have to agree with Thanas here.
Hunting for the sake of sport is morally wrong IMO, as is any harm done to animals for sport (that includes fishing).
Yes. I find the current fad here for "catch and release" fishing abhorrent. It's supposed to be "better" because you don't kill the fish. Really? If you've ever gotten a fishhook into your finger you know it's pretty fucking painful, trying hook your mouth, then either ripping it out of your mouth or cutting the line and just leaving the damn hook in. :roll: WTF?

Either catch the fish kill it and eat it or or don't fucking go fishing.
A life is like a garden. Perfect moments can be had, but not preserved, except in memory. Leonard Nimoy.

Now I did a job. I got nothing but trouble since I did it, not to mention more than a few unkind words as regard to my character so let me make this abundantly clear. I do the job. And then I get paid.- Malcolm Reynolds, Captain of Serenity, which sums up my feelings regarding the lawsuit discussed here.

If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich. - John F. Kennedy

Sam Vimes Theory of Economic Injustice
User avatar
Zwinmar
Jedi Master
Posts: 1105
Joined: 2005-03-24 11:55am
Location: nunyadamnbusiness

Re: Tories want fox hunting back

Post by Zwinmar »

I don't do catch and release unless it is too small. Fish have to be over a certain length to be legally kept (based on species.) That said, I find fishing boring anyways, If I were doing it for food I would use a net not a rod and reel.
User avatar
jwl
Jedi Master
Posts: 1137
Joined: 2013-01-02 04:31pm

Re: Tories want fox hunting back

Post by jwl »

I'm okay with this, if and only if they retrain hunting dogs to make sure they don't tear the foxes apart.
Patroklos wrote:I see nothing different between this and taking an hour to hand reel in a marlin or tuna while sport fishing. And just like fox hunting that requires non competitive advantages like rods and reals, bait and power boats. Unlike fox hunting instead of just being chased/fought to exhaustion (and usually NOT killed) the fish has a giant hook in its mouth that a multi hundred horse power boat and thousand dollar reel are adding pressure to.
I've heard from fishers that the hook in a fish's mouth doesn't actually hurt it. It doesn't have nerves there or something.
Zaune wrote:
Thanas wrote:I don't see much use in hunting the fox like aristocrats used to do, just shoot the animal if it is necessary. Hunting for the sake of sport is morally wrong IMO, as is any harm done to animals for sport (that includes fishing). Sustenance and industrial production are valid reasons, hurting animals because one needs to get his jollies is not IMO.
There's not much use in hunting anything in this country, to be honest. Just look at how we hunt game birds; we have to outright farm the bloody things so there's enough to be worth shooting.
Without grouse hunting there would be no heather moorland as we know it, and I'd quite like to keep that. Also, unlike fox hunting, the grouse are simply shot, and then the meat is generally eaten, so it's not radically different from commercial farming.
User avatar
Broomstick
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 28846
Joined: 2004-01-02 07:04pm
Location: Industrial armpit of the US Midwest

Re: Tories want fox hunting back

Post by Broomstick »

jwl wrote:I've heard from fishers that the hook in a fish's mouth doesn't actually hurt it. It doesn't have nerves there or something.
Right. They can't possibly be biased.

Why would a fish NOT have nerves in its mouth? Doesn't everything else that eats have sensation in its mouth/lips/tongue?
A life is like a garden. Perfect moments can be had, but not preserved, except in memory. Leonard Nimoy.

Now I did a job. I got nothing but trouble since I did it, not to mention more than a few unkind words as regard to my character so let me make this abundantly clear. I do the job. And then I get paid.- Malcolm Reynolds, Captain of Serenity, which sums up my feelings regarding the lawsuit discussed here.

If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich. - John F. Kennedy

Sam Vimes Theory of Economic Injustice
User avatar
jwl
Jedi Master
Posts: 1137
Joined: 2013-01-02 04:31pm

Re: Tories want fox hunting back

Post by jwl »

Broomstick wrote:
jwl wrote:I've heard from fishers that the hook in a fish's mouth doesn't actually hurt it. It doesn't have nerves there or something.
Right. They can't possibly be biased.

Why would a fish NOT have nerves in its mouth? Doesn't everything else that eats have sensation in its mouth/lips/tongue?
Well I wouldn't know. I'm not in the habit of spiking other animals in the mouth and seeing what happens. It could be only humans feel pain in our mouths for all I know.

There's a difference between pain and sensation, too. It's possible to have drugs that cut out pain and keep a sensation.

I would assume that your argument is that pain in the mouth is what prevents fish from eating sharp objects, but if fish didn't eat sharp objects, fishing wouldn't happen in the first place.

I don't know how reliable it is, which is why I said who told me instead of just stating it. They would be biased but I'd expect them to know a lot about fish, too.
User avatar
Thanas
Magister
Magister
Posts: 30779
Joined: 2004-06-26 07:49pm

Re: Tories want fox hunting back

Post by Thanas »

It is complete bullshit.
The Hook That Hurts: Scientists Tip the Scales Against Anglers

By Günther Stockinger

Bad news for angling enthusiasts: Fish might be much more than the mere reflex machines previously thought. New research shows that they are apparently conscious of and can suffer from pain, and scientists are calling for them to be treated the same as mammals and birds.

Could millions of hobby anglers and sports fishermen really be wrong? They believe that getting a nasty-looking hook stuck in the mouth doesn't hurt fish. Fishing enthusiasts insist the nervous system of the aquatic creatures is far too primitive for them to feel real pain.

After they bite, fish often put up an impressive fight. But doesn't this simply confirm how little agony they actually experience? "If fishing hooks were painful, then a fish on a hook wouldn't fight, but rather follow the pull of the line as willingly as a bull that can be easily led with a nose ring," argues Viennese fisherman Johann Brabenetz in the trade journal Der Fliegenfischer ("The Fly Fisherman").

Until now, angling aficionados have seldom been accused of cruelty since fish are regarded as lower life forms. Indeed, hardly anyone believes that they have feelings like mammals and birds, and most people only have emotional feelings for warm-blooded animals.

But now the image of these robot-like creatures with their purported three-second memory is starting to crack. The latest findings from fish biologists, neuroanatomists and behavioral scientists show that these evolutionarily ancient vertebrates are far more than mere reflex machines.

Researchers from Queen's University, in Belfast, have proven that when fish are subjected to pain stimuli, the signals by no means simply ebb away in the spinal cord. Scientists have discovered sensitive skin areas directly behind the gill covers of goldfish and trout. Using implanted electrodes, they have been able to show that the nerve cells located there send signals directly to the fish's brain.

When researchers poked the animals with needles, a flurry of neuron messages were transmitted to the endbrain -- the very region of the brain where pain signals are also processed by birds and mammals.

Not a Simple Reflex

Similar results have now been achieved with Atlantic salmon, carp and cod. "These studies demonstrate that higher brain areas are implicated in the fish response to potentially painful events and that their response is not a simple reflex," explains Lynne Sneddon, a fish expert at England's University of Chester.

A Spanish research team was even able to identify an area of the goldfish brain that appears to serve a function similar to the limbic system, the region of the human brain that becomes highly active when people experience fear or pain. As with mammals, these cerebral receptors in fish consist of a number of anatomical structures: Incoming signals to the amygdala are processed by an emotional filter, while the hippocampus is for memory, but also plays a key role in spatial orientation.

Researchers have long searched in vain for these two regions -- apparently because they were looking in the wrong place. It turns out that as a fish matures from an embryo to a full-grown adult, its brain architecture is turned inside out: While the human amygdala and hippocampus lie deep below the cerebral hemispheres of humans, the comparable structures of a fully developed fish are located directly on the surface of the endbrain (see graphic).

Behavioral tests have confirmed these findings: Goldfish whose hippocampus-like structures in the endbrain have been surgically disabled suddenly lose their sense of orientation -- as do mammals whose corresponding cerebral regions have been disabled.

Furthermore, when researchers put the amygdala-like sections of the endbrain out of action, the fish were no longer capable of learning from electric shocks.

This proves that these supposedly insensitive aquatic animals have the necessary hardware in their heads to feel fear and pain. "Even though the structure and function of the fish equivalent is very much simpler than our own limbic system, the fact that scientists have discovered the presence of similar structures is impressive," explains Victoria Braithwaite, a zoologists at Pennsylvania State University.

A number of years ago, Braithwaite caused a stir with another discovery that she made about fish physiology. She found more than 20 pain receptors around the mouth and head of rainbow trout -- ironically located precisely where the barbed hooks of anglers penetrate the fish's flesh.

These front receptors of the nervous system react not only to pinpricks, but also to heat and noxious chemicals. Combined with the specialized nerve fibers that transmit pain impulses, the receptors don't work any differently than they do among higher vertebrates.

But are fish also capable of converting their perception of these complex signals into a conscious awareness of pain? A wide range of behavioral tests at least suggest this is the case.

Rainbow trout whose lips were injected with bee venom or acetic acid ventilated vigorously with their gill covers for nearly three-and-a-half hours, stopped feeding, rocked back and forth on the floor of the tank or rubbed their lips on the glass walls. They displayed far more than just three-second reactions.

Trout that had been subjected to noxious chemicals paid little attention to a brightly-colored Lego tower introduced into their tank despite the fact that they normally avoid new objects, suggesting that their attention was dominated by pain. However, fish that simultaneously received painkillers and chemicals displayed the usual degree of caution with regard to the foreign objects -- because the morphine had apparently eliminated the pain.

A 20-strong team of experts working on behalf of the EU Commission in Brussels recently evaluated all the experiments done on the subject. Since all of the current findings on the ability of fish to feel pain are based on a limited number of species, including trout, carp, zebra fish and goldfish, the group concluded that it is not possible, for the time being, to make generalizations. Nevertheless, the experts recognized these insights into the emotional life of fish: "From studies of sensory systems, brain structure and functionality, pain, fear and distress, there is some evidence for the neural components of sentience in some species of fish."

The experts not only believe them capable of fear and pain, but also sensations of pleasure. For example, oxytocin -- often referred to as the "love hormone" -- has also been documented in fish.

Sports fishing advocates slam such statements as inadmissible anthropomorphisms. They say that human attributes have been naively attributed to animals.

Although the angling lobby can no longer deny that fish have a functioning system to detect painful sensations, they still maintain that only the highly developed cerebral cortex found in mammals is capable of producing a conscious awareness of registered pain stimuli. "There is no human-like creature hidden in a fish brain," argues US researcher James Rose, an expert often cited by the fishing industry.

"The fish's pain and suffering has not been proven," agrees Robert Arlinghaus, a fish expert at the Berlin-based Leibniz Institute for Freshwater Ecology and Inland Fishing. "We simply do not know if fish have such feelings."

Brain Fluid Swishing About

For many experts, however, the lack of a cerebral cortex no longer appears to be sufficient reason to rule out conscious awareness. Remarkable medical cases have cast doubt on the old school of thought: Neurologists occasionally report people who have only half a cerebrum. Where others have synapses chattering away, these individuals only have brain fluid swishing about -- and yet they are often highly intelligent and socially well adapted.

Other researchers are now venturing even further. They maintain that they have discovered that even invertebrates have a certain awareness of pain. Robert Elwood, an animal behavior specialist at Queen's University, in Belfast, applied acetic acid to the sensitive antennae of prawns. The crustaceans subsequently rubbed the afflicted areas for up to five minutes. According to Elwood, this reaction is reminiscent of how mammals react to pain.

Octopuses, the most intelligent of all cephalopods, may enjoy an even more diverse emotional life. These animals, which are famous for their amazing contortions, never cease to amaze researchers: They often quickly manage to figure out how to open childproof drug containers if they know that tasty treats are hidden inside, and reports of nocturnal escapes from reputedly well-secured tanks are legion. "There are a lot of reasons why people don't want to think about pain among invertebrates," says Elwood.

Hobby anglers and sports fishermen are afraid that new regulations could be introduced that would limit their fishing pleasure.

Current legislation in Germany already stipulates that anglers can only head out with a rod and reel if they are fishing for food or culling stocks to maintain healthy fish populations. Tournaments where the catch is thrown back in the water after it is weighed have been banned -- along with the use of minnows as live bait.
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------
My LPs
User avatar
jwl
Jedi Master
Posts: 1137
Joined: 2013-01-02 04:31pm

Re: Tories want fox hunting back

Post by jwl »

A number of years ago, Braithwaite caused a stir with another discovery that she made about fish physiology. She found more than 20 pain receptors around the mouth and head of rainbow trout -- ironically located precisely where the barbed hooks of anglers penetrate the fish's flesh.

These front receptors of the nervous system react not only to pinpricks, but also to heat and noxious chemicals. Combined with the specialized nerve fibers that transmit pain impulses, the receptors don't work any differently than they do among higher vertebrates.
Oh. Okay then.
User avatar
Ziggy Stardust
Sith Devotee
Posts: 3114
Joined: 2006-09-10 10:16pm
Location: Research Triangle, NC

Re: Tories want fox hunting back

Post by Ziggy Stardust »

Broomstick wrote: Different forms of hunting have different levels of fairness. US style bow and rifle hunting after deer is "fair" in that no hunter is guaranteed a kill, in fact, quite a few hunters I know get a deer 50% or less of the time. It's not fair because humans are more intelligent, have fire arms, and engage in a variety of strategies to get deer, it's not a wholesale slaughter.
Also, many parts of the US are WILDLY overpopulated with deer (in no small part due to how human behavior has wiped out the natural predators for deer in many regions). It is a huge environmental problem, and there is a great need for the deer population to be culled through seasonal hunting.
User avatar
Thanas
Magister
Magister
Posts: 30779
Joined: 2004-06-26 07:49pm

Re: Tories want fox hunting back

Post by Thanas »

Same for Germany and most of the western world as well.
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------
My LPs
User avatar
His Divine Shadow
Commence Primary Ignition
Posts: 12791
Joined: 2002-07-03 07:22am
Location: Finland, west coast

Re: Tories want fox hunting back

Post by His Divine Shadow »

hey free meat, and you get to get out in nature from the urban hellscape.
Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who did not.
User avatar
Broomstick
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 28846
Joined: 2004-01-02 07:04pm
Location: Industrial armpit of the US Midwest

Re: Tories want fox hunting back

Post by Broomstick »

Well, not so free when you account for the licensing fees, cost of ammunition, etc.

There are families in my area that never buy meat, they raise or hunt all of it that they eat, but you have to be methodical about it, make it a profession of sorts. As opposed to a more casual hunter where it's more about getting outside and away from the "urban hellscape".

Then there are drunken louts that give everyone a bad name. Wish there were stiff penalties for carrying a firearm while intoxicated. You shouldn't hunt drunk any more than you should drive drunk.
A life is like a garden. Perfect moments can be had, but not preserved, except in memory. Leonard Nimoy.

Now I did a job. I got nothing but trouble since I did it, not to mention more than a few unkind words as regard to my character so let me make this abundantly clear. I do the job. And then I get paid.- Malcolm Reynolds, Captain of Serenity, which sums up my feelings regarding the lawsuit discussed here.

If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich. - John F. Kennedy

Sam Vimes Theory of Economic Injustice
Post Reply