The image above (click to enlarge) was taken by me on Monday 23rd February. It is a picture of a Mountain Hare, it was taken just outside Tameside on the hills on the edge of the Peak District. The photograph may look pretty unremarkable - but it was a challenge to get close enough to the hare to take the picture because the hare is a beautiful but nervous creature and very wary of human beings - for good reason! The Mountain Hare is not a native species to these parts, it was introduced from Scotland during the Victorian era to enhance the hunting experience of the local gentry who sometimes got bored with shooting just mooreland grouse.If you asked me fifteen years ago if I thought shooting hare, grouse or any other type of live quarry constituted good fun or sport - I am sure my reply would have been yes, however my opinions have now changed and you would be guaranteed the opposite answer. One defining moment in my Damascene conversion occurred on a deer stalking trip in the south of England a number of years ago. Due to the nature of my job at the time I ended up as a guest of some very wealthy Hooray Henry types from Redhill in Surrey. My boss and I were invited to join these extremely well heeled individuals on a night time deer stalking expedition and what I witnessed was sheer blood lust which involved the ‘stalkers’, three converted short wheel based Land Rovers fitted with incredibly powerful spotlights and the majestic Fallow Deer. The stalkers were obsessed with killing these defenceless creatures by shooting them with hunting rifles. When the nights butchery was done the ‘stalkers’ were ecstatic when swapping details on their exploits during the hunt. I was far from impressed, if they had entered a swamp armed only with a hunting knife and took on a crocodile or fought a lion armed with nothing other than a spear I may have been impressed - but to stand on a platform on the back of a LR taking pot shots at totally defenceless animals is far from impressive, brave or heroic.
This topic has no direct bearing on Tameside, but after viewing the emotive exchanges in the comments section on the Piddington item on the subject of hunting I decided I would write this item to hear the opinions of others and state my case on the matter which is : if you kill it - you eat it - end of!!!
55 comments:
It is a disgusting thing to take part in (Hunting for pleasure)
Fox hunting is vermin control. Since it was 'banned' more foxes have been snared and shot and a centuries old English tradition has, on paper, had to adopt new methods to survive. The reality is that this law is virtually unenforceable and hunting is still going on. This law was imposed for reasons of class hatred and the fact that virtually nobody who hunts votes Labour. Compare this to the government's strong support for the barbaric practice of Halal butchery to get the Islamic block vote.
Jack Law, it depends on whose interpretation of vermin you use when classifying foxes as such. In my book rats = vermin but foxes = pests - and then only in rural communities who have vulnerable livestock. However I do agree that Labour introduced the hunting ban for vindictive political reasons rather than reasons of genuine animal welfare.
TC, your rather generous description of foxes as pests might change if one had just got in your henhouse and killed every bird you owned. To farmers they are a serious menace to be eradicated.
Shooting is generally the most humane method followed by traditional hunting and then snaring which is now much more common because of the 'ban' on the redjacketed brigade.
Cut the 'moral' superiority. Hunting is an ancient tradition as natural to man as trying to impress females. Give me a REASON why it's 'disgusting' without moralising.
I'd bloody love to go whalehunting or shoot big game on safari. It's a perfectly natural instinct.
I see the occasional fox in my garden and they never cause any kind of problem, in-fact I would keep one for a pet if I could tame one, but on the other hand - cats, hmm, what can I say about these creatures? Well my definition of cats would be pretty close to yours of foxes. I make no excuses by admitting that I am biased against cats for a number of reasons including my constant battle to prevent them from killing garden birds and my little house mice friends who live in a crack in a perimeter wall. I often let my hound charge out of the house to chase off the cats and despite knowing he stands virtually no chance of catching them - I would be lying if I said in the heat of the moment that sometimes I wish he could. In my opinion cats are cold blooded killers who kill for fun - some say the same thing about foxes, but in both cases these are basic animal instincts and what is one mans pet can be another mans pest - it is all down to individual interpretation.
WestRoyKevin, YOU don't like hunting, fine that's your opinion. But don't TELL me it's 'perverted' or 'disgusting' without giving a reason.
Craven the Hunter, “hunting is an ancient tradition” so was burning women at the stake after calling them witches - but it does not make either right. As I previously stated - I have no objection to hunting as long as the beast are slain for food as their role in the food chain dictates. But killing for ‘sport’ or pleasure is a completely different matter and one to which I am opposed.
WestRoyKevin, Grousemoors are managed and this hugely benefits local wildlife. Much of this land would be used for other purposes such as farming and quarrying if commercial shooting was stopped.
TC, I respect your right to be squeamish about hunting for sport but to compare it to witchhunting is plain daft.
Man has a natural desire to hunt and kill animals. Such instincts helped make us what we are; they should be controlled but to abandon them, especially with no reason, would be totally irrational and detrimental to our sense of identity as a species. Individual squeamishness is not a reason for humanity to do or not do anything.
WestRoyKevin, you not liking it is an opinion not a reason.
Those against hunting come up with a load of rubbish in favour of their argument. Below are some of the claims they make... and the truth.
They say: Hunting is cruel
Rubbish.
“Hunting by hounds is the most natural and humane way of controlling the population of all four quarry species - fox, deer, hare and mink - in the countryside.” Statement supported by over 500 members of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons.
They say: Animals are chased to exhaustion
Rubbish.
Foxes and other quarry species are not hunted to the point of physical exhaustion and collapse, rather to the point where, when still running hard, they are caught up by the leading hounds.
They say: It is done by 'toffs' on horses who enjoy cruelty.
Rubbish.
This pathetic attitude is wholly untrue. 195,000 ordinary women and men from all walks of life, support hunting, most of them on foot. Logically it cannot be right for MPs to ban hunting with hounds, and not hunting with a gun or a fishing rod, purely because they don’t like the people they believe support hunting with dogs. The ban on hunting is an attack on the people that hunt, rather than an improvement in animal welfare.
They say: The ban saves animals' lives.
Rubbish.
Lord Burns, chairman of the latest Government inquiry into hunting reported that, “With the ban now in place, I have little doubt that at least an equivalent number of foxes, deer and hares will be killed by other means.” The welfare case for hunting is irrefutable.
They say: MP's must decide.
Rubbish.
The vast majority of opposition comes from urban Labour MPs with no hunting in their constituencies and is often based on old political scores and not on reality. Decisions on hunting should be made by those involved in wildlife management.
Barry Sheerman, one of the three Labour MPs to vote against the ban in September 2004, admited to The Telegraph, [that] the new law is, in large part, class-driven revenge for the Tories' smashing of the miners' strike, and the privatisation of the nationalised industries.
Guess which European government led the world on animal protection issues? Click the blue for a clue.
Just had a look at the dogs you are on about West - "wipe out the wildlife" - don't make me laugh - if there were 50 of them they couldn't "wipe out the wildlife" - most of the wildlife would be too quick for them. And from the reading, they are more used to flush to the gun rather than to kill anything ..... Admit it - you are trying to have a cheap shot and it backfired!
I don't agree with foxhunting, I think it's cruel. On the other hand, I think it's just typical of this Labour Government to ban something which is part of our English Heritage but still allow cruel Halal practices in our country.
Conservative.
I agree - seems to me that if they do need controlling, getting dogs to flush them to the gun is far quicker and more reliable. Typical labour though, cannot wait for Conservatives to return to power.
Look at this
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/s/1098691_benefit_cheat_had_300000_in_bank
You don't have to agree with whatever people to choose to do. Your party allegedly wants "free Britain" back - so that means people can do whatever they like if it is within the law. You are sounding like a labour politician. Concentrate on something worthwhile West - like your alleged fight back campaign. You are in danger of becoming boring...... again .....
Good - then you can stop the monotonous drone trying to get back at your neighbour - when you posted that "anyone looking for ongoing animosity will be disappointed" - again with your slurs you play right into your opponents hands. At times, West, although I sometimes admire your political stance, you do become obsessive and veer off the track.
true - but you could enhance your political career instead of destroying yourself at every turn by putting obvious slurs and potentially libellous comments into print - surely you have more important things to do?
Very true - it is however, libellous to accuse people of lying or breaking the law, particularly obvious when the focus of your rantings happen to be people who had to give evidence against you to satisfy the political wranglings of the police and judiciary.
I truly believe you do not know that you have and havent said - wonder why you are suddenly against these sorts of activities - they are not in the BNP manifesto, in fact on questioning, I believe Mr Griffin confirmed the he too, is in favour of people having a free choice on the hunting matter. You are so transparent ...... zzzzzzzzzzz And by the way - we have so many more imporant political issue, which should be discussed on here. People can see straight through what you are trying to do.
I come here looking for political debate but sadly there isn't much of that - just you posting on petty and personal scores. If I was the moderator I'd remove you.
I don't think it's natural to live off the state, intimidate your wife and carry on a political campaign - but hey, whatever blows your skirt up ..........
Conservative, your Party says it will bring back foxhunting. It will not ban Halal butchery because like every other Party apart from the BNP it is desperate to secure the Islamic block vote. If this means one law for Farmer Giles and another one for Farmer Mohammed so be it. It's called selling out.
I could understand it if you were nut cutlet eating lefties bleating on and on about animal cruelty.
Or if there was some honesty in a point of view and included factory farming and animal slaughter as a issue as a whole.
But all you go on about is "cruel halal" Explain something, what is the real difference in Halal slaughter of, say, a chicken and your non cruel way? I presume that you know that the day of the farmer ringing the chickens neck has long gone.
Conservative Values, the real difference between Halal slaughter and the humane method carried out in civilized countries is the use of pre-stunning where the animal is rendered unconscious then killed. This reduces suffering to an absolute minimum. The Halal method is to cut the animal's throat while it is fully conscious which massively increases suffering, death taking up to two minutes.
The honesty in this point of view is that WE believe everyone should obey the same British law.
There is no problem with factory farming as it is legal and regulated under our rules. Anyone caught inflicting unnecessary suffering is prosecuted. Under Halal cruelty is deliberate.
I presume that you know nothing and care less about civilized methods of slaughter as opposed to utterly unnecessary medieval barbarism.
Halal or not the chicken is hung upside down, has its throat cut and bleeds to death.
In your world, its not cruel that after living a life of being force fed in factory farms with no natural light, being crammed in so that the chicken cannot sit. That same chicken is then hung upside down and forced into salt water, gasping for breath, lungs filling up and then electrocuted before having its throat cut and bled to death. Yet cutting the throat without the factory farming methods, salt bath and electrocution is cruel.
Now you're just taking the piss!
CV sums up exactly why traditional Conservatives are voting with their feet and leaving in droves. Modern Conservatives policy makers are obsessed with PC and being 'right on'. No wonder the BNP and UKIP are taking many disillusioned Conservative members.
utter tosh, dream on. You should stop believing your own publicity
Conservative Values has been listening far too much to Hugh Fearnley Whittingstall.
lmao
Conservative Values, In every large scale study the chickens you are so obsessed with have been shown to suffer far less stress in a properly run factory farm. Just because YOU don't like the idea of it doesn't affect the chickens.
Why do they need natural light? to get a sun tan. Grow up.
If you have a problem with animal welfare you can take political action to try and change it. That won't affect the Muslims you haven't uttered a word of criticism about because they are well on the way to having their own laws because the three main Parties are too spineless to stand up to them and too frightened of losing their block vote which swings a large number of seats. This appeasement will accelerate the rate of Islamification of our country while you're bleating on about chicken's rights.
Yawn …Where do you get the idea that I find factory farming repulsive? I was pointing out that you wax lyrical about the killing method yet ignore the production method which merely demonstrates that any argument you have is based on prejudice rather than animal welfare. I have no problem with either factory farming or Halal killing, that is a consistent rational point of view. To complain about Halal yet support factory farming is just demonstrating both ignorance and prejudice.
Conservative Values, I get the idea that you find factory farming repulsive from your use of the words 'force fed' 'no natural light' 'being crammed in so that the chicken can't sit' etc and your long drawn out description of what you clearly see as the animal's suffering. This 'production method' is legal under British law for EVERYONE, Halal is only legal for certain groups; in other words if a British slaughterman did it he would be prosecuted for animal cruelty, an Islamic or Jewish slaughterman would not. The RSPCA have stated that they believe Halal slaughter inflicts unnecessary pain and suffering on animals, which is why it is banned. To compare properly run factory farming with the deliberate cruelty of Halal is neither 'rational' or 'consistent'.
Every 'rational' person SHOULD be prejudiced against any individual or group that wants to inflict totally unnecessary suffering on animals, subvert British law or their apologists.
Islam IS a threat to this country. All the demographic evidence, deliberately separatist behaviour, violence or threatened violence and increasing demands for their own laws shows this in absolute clarity. They are being aided and abetted by the appeasers, apologists and traitors who either have ulterior motives or use a mask of 'tolerance' to disguise their fear.
Conservative 'values' include your Party leader saying nothing when the Labour Home Secretary is caught with her hand in the till because massive numbers of your own Party's MP's have been up to exactly the same thing.
I’m delighted to say that I will never be able to say anything about the quality, honesty or integrity of BNP MP's ... it might take you a few minutes to work out why so I’ll explain.
You are unelectable. What’s it like being a pressure group with constantly unmet aspirations?
Pressure groups don't have elected councillors or members of the London Assembly. Will you still be saying that if we win seats in the European Parliament? If we're unelectable why does our vote share keep rising as the reality of what the three main Parties have done to Britain becomes increasingly undeniable?
Don't be too sure about what can happen in the near future. Your methods of arrogantly casting aspersions on the intelligence of those who disagree with you shows, ironically a lack of intelligence, desperation and a chronic inability to construct a reasoned argument.
Stop people killing foxes for pleasure
Old cow, why?
Post a Comment