ITS BANNED - THE M***************Rs

[Equibrit]

November 19, 2004

Hunting

Speaker's 14 words that mean an end to hunting
By David Charter, Chief Political Correspondent






A BILL to ban hunting next February finally received Royal Assent last night after a day of sometimes farcical shuttling between the Commons and Lords.
Michael Martin, the Commons Speaker, certified that the Hunting Bill should pass under the Parliament Act after being rejected by peers in successive parliamentary sessions. The final rejection yesterday afternoon had, he said, “brought us to the end of the road�.

Mr Martin made his announcement just after 9pm to cries of “shame� from the Tory backbenches and “hear hear� from Labour MPs.



Reading from notes, he told MPs: “I have to inform the House that a message has been brought from the Lords as follows: ‘The Lords insists in their amendments to the Hunting Bill to which the Commons have insisted on their disagreement for which insistence they assign their reasons.

“ ‘They insist on their amendments to which the Commons have disagreed for which insistence they assign their reasons.And they disagree to the amendment proposed by the Commons in lieu of the Lords, amendments for which disagreement they assign their reasons’ Order.’ �

Mr Martin, MP for Glasgow Springburn, added, to laughter: “I read these messages, I do not understand them. It was not a Glasgow man who wrote that one anyway.�

He then pronounced: “I am satisfied that all the provisions of the Parliament Act have been met�, and declared that the Bill should be passed.

During the afternoon, MPs had again refused to accept a Lords attempt to put licensed hunting back in the Bill and also rejected a hastily-tabled government compromise to delay a ban to the end of July 2007. A proposal delaying implementation for 18 months was then sent back to the Lords. Liberal Democrats switched to support the package, but other peers heeded appeals from pro-hunters to stick to their principles and reject the deal because it would have seen the Bill pass without the need for the Parliament Act. They voted against the Bill by 153 to 114, a majority of 39.

Tony Blair, asked earlier about hunting during a press conference with President Chirac, seemed to accept that the resistance of the Lords was inevitable. “I have tried for the best part of two years to find a compromise, since there are people who feel passionately on either side of this debate,� he said. “It was not possible to find a compromise in Parliament. The action will no doubt now transfer to the courts.�

In the Commons there were chaotic scenes and at one point Mr Martin suspended the sitting for 40 minutes to digest a series of new amendments.

The peers had sent the Bill back to the Commons on Wednesday night with changes allowing fox, stag and hare hunting under licence. They had also inserted a timetable for change of December 2007, instead of the three months set out in the Bill.

Yesterday MPs arrived to find that Alun Michael, the Rural Affairs Minister, had put down an amendment to delay the ban until July 2007 and then his parliamentary private secretary Peter Bradley (Lab, The Wrekin) put down a second amendment delaying a ban until July 2006.

Hilary Armstrong, the Chief Whip, was reported to be having intense discussions in the Members’ Tea Room after tempers flared among MPs suspicious that some kind of deal was being prepared.

Sir Gerald Kaufman (Lab, Manchester Gorton) raised a point of order to complain that Whips were applying pressure to vote for a 2007 implementation. Mr Michael insisted that MPs had a free vote. Mr Michael told MPs that delaying the ban until 2006 or 2007 would enable the Commons “not only to be reasonable but be seen to be reasonable — going the extra mile, if you like�.

Gregory Barker (C, Bexhill and Battle) protested: “Everyone in the countryside who cares for liberty and the environment will see that your machinations over commencement has nothing to do with reasonableness but shabby horse-trading behind the scenes on the Labour benches.�

Mr Michael told the Commons that it was the Lords which had “chosen confrontation� by voting for a “feeble version� of a hunting registration scheme.

David Winnick (Lab Walsall N) said that allowing delay would “give the feeling we are terrified of the threats of violence and thuggery from those who intend to break the law�.

For the Conservatives, James Gray said: “If this House decides to use the Parliament Act to force through this bad illiberal law, they will be doing so against the wishes of the Prime Minister, against the wishes of the Home Secretary who will have to police it, both of whom voted against it 48 hours ago.�

Lord Falconer, the Lord Chancellor, later made a prorogation speech in the Lords listing “the measures Her Majesty’s Government has enacted�. Included in that list, finally, was be the Hunting Act. A clerk then pronounced, in Norman French: “La Reyne le veult� — the Queen wills it.

[Equibrit]

November 19, 2004

Hunting

Speaker's 14 words that mean an end to hunting
By David Charter, Chief Political Correspondent






A BILL to ban hunting next February finally received Royal Assent last night after a day of sometimes farcical shuttling between the Commons and Lords.
Michael Martin, the Commons Speaker, certified that the Hunting Bill should pass under the Parliament Act after being rejected by peers in successive parliamentary sessions. The final rejection yesterday afternoon had, he said, “brought us to the end of the road�.

Mr Martin made his announcement just after 9pm to cries of “shame� from the Tory backbenches and “hear hear� from Labour MPs.



Reading from notes, he told MPs: “I have to inform the House that a message has been brought from the Lords as follows: ‘The Lords insists in their amendments to the Hunting Bill to which the Commons have insisted on their disagreement for which insistence they assign their reasons.

“ ‘They insist on their amendments to which the Commons have disagreed for which insistence they assign their reasons.And they disagree to the amendment proposed by the Commons in lieu of the Lords, amendments for which disagreement they assign their reasons’ Order.’ �

Mr Martin, MP for Glasgow Springburn, added, to laughter: “I read these messages, I do not understand them. It was not a Glasgow man who wrote that one anyway.�

He then pronounced: “I am satisfied that all the provisions of the Parliament Act have been met�, and declared that the Bill should be passed.

During the afternoon, MPs had again refused to accept a Lords attempt to put licensed hunting back in the Bill and also rejected a hastily-tabled government compromise to delay a ban to the end of July 2007. A proposal delaying implementation for 18 months was then sent back to the Lords. Liberal Democrats switched to support the package, but other peers heeded appeals from pro-hunters to stick to their principles and reject the deal because it would have seen the Bill pass without the need for the Parliament Act. They voted against the Bill by 153 to 114, a majority of 39.

Tony Blair, asked earlier about hunting during a press conference with President Chirac, seemed to accept that the resistance of the Lords was inevitable. “I have tried for the best part of two years to find a compromise, since there are people who feel passionately on either side of this debate,� he said. “It was not possible to find a compromise in Parliament. The action will no doubt now transfer to the courts.�

In the Commons there were chaotic scenes and at one point Mr Martin suspended the sitting for 40 minutes to digest a series of new amendments.

The peers had sent the Bill back to the Commons on Wednesday night with changes allowing fox, stag and hare hunting under licence. They had also inserted a timetable for change of December 2007, instead of the three months set out in the Bill.

Yesterday MPs arrived to find that Alun Michael, the Rural Affairs Minister, had put down an amendment to delay the ban until July 2007 and then his parliamentary private secretary Peter Bradley (Lab, The Wrekin) put down a second amendment delaying a ban until July 2006.

Hilary Armstrong, the Chief Whip, was reported to be having intense discussions in the Members’ Tea Room after tempers flared among MPs suspicious that some kind of deal was being prepared.

Sir Gerald Kaufman (Lab, Manchester Gorton) raised a point of order to complain that Whips were applying pressure to vote for a 2007 implementation. Mr Michael insisted that MPs had a free vote. Mr Michael told MPs that delaying the ban until 2006 or 2007 would enable the Commons “not only to be reasonable but be seen to be reasonable — going the extra mile, if you like�.

Gregory Barker (C, Bexhill and Battle) protested: “Everyone in the countryside who cares for liberty and the environment will see that your machinations over commencement has nothing to do with reasonableness but shabby horse-trading behind the scenes on the Labour benches.�

Mr Michael told the Commons that it was the Lords which had “chosen confrontation� by voting for a “feeble version� of a hunting registration scheme.

David Winnick (Lab Walsall N) said that allowing delay would “give the feeling we are terrified of the threats of violence and thuggery from those who intend to break the law�.

For the Conservatives, James Gray said: “If this House decides to use the Parliament Act to force through this bad illiberal law, they will be doing so against the wishes of the Prime Minister, against the wishes of the Home Secretary who will have to police it, both of whom voted against it 48 hours ago.�

Lord Falconer, the Lord Chancellor, later made a prorogation speech in the Lords listing “the measures Her Majesty’s Government has enacted�. Included in that list, finally, was be the Hunting Act. A clerk then pronounced, in Norman French: “La Reyne le veult� — the Queen wills it.

[germangurlmom]

What a profoundly tragic day.

Did anyone else note the sad irony in the article regarding the government term "Whip"?

[Killian]

No Way! That's unreal. Can they overturn it? Or whatever one does in Parliament?

[J Swan]

I know in the US it would be litigated up to the Supreme Court - but I admit to ignorance in this case.

I'm wondering if it will be like the Volstead Act. You know - rum running, speakeasy's, paying off cops to look the other way - large scale disregard of the law. Finally it was gotten rid of.

But even in this case - if years later its overturned - all the hounds will be dead - a new generation will not grow up riding cross country - the whole infrastructure will be gone. In its place will be pavement and shopping centers.

So perhaps that's part of the plan? I mean - how permanent does it have to be? It takes years to learn to work with hounds, establish a breeding program, train the hounds,,,etc..

And finally - does anyone know if the MFHA is going to help out and bring some of those bloodlines over here? I know we want some different traits but still - the foundation of the American Foxhound is the English hound.

And does anyone think we can absorb some of the staff into American hunts? It should be easy for them to get a visa. I'd be interested in know how much American foxhunters will be able to help out our fellow hunters.

[BarbB]

That's incredible. I never really thought it would happen.
Proof of the animal rights lobby at work.....if you think you and your animals are safe.....think again. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/sigh.gif

[Killian]

JSwan - I was thinking similarly. What a loss. I bet we'll see quite a few hunt staff come across the pond....I can't believe it actually happened. The Queen & her family hunt for goodness sakes. Can't folks have private packs on their own land? Gracious!

[Sannois]

What an utter tragedy. I cant believe it! I agree with barbb PETA now has a fish have feelings too campaign. God I never thought I would see the day where foxhunting in England would no longer exist! its a way of life ans such a sourse of income for so many! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

[Lookout]

It's not about animal rights at all. It's class warfare. Can they or do they have drag hunts? At least this would preserve the countryside and continue the hounds and cross country riding traditions.

[Jumphigh83]

Exactly right Lookout!! YOu beat me to the punch...they are trying that same "have" and "have not" trick in the US but hopefully we are smart enough to see through it....The "rich" get the tax breaks, the "rich" get away without paying enough taxes, etc etc! It isnt about Foxes or hunting it is about jealousy and hatred.

[Cherry]

I'm just curious--what's the "sport" in chasing a fox down until it's nearly exhausted and then allowing the dogs to tear him limb from limb, or do I have that scenario mixed up with another "sport"? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

Why not just engage in drag hunts? That way both sides win.... http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I just don't understand the outrage....

[J Swan]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Cherry:
I'm just curious--what's the "sport" in chasing a fox down until it's nearly exhausted and then allowing the dogs to tear him limb from limb, or do I have that scenario mixed up with another "sport"?

Why not just engage in drag hunts? That way both sides win....

I just don't understand the outrage.... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You have that scenario mixed up with something else. That's not foxhunting. If you participated, you'd know better than to say that.

And drag hunting is not the same as foxhunting. If you knew anything about either of those - you'd not say that either.

[Magnolia]

http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/uhoh.gif That's a tradition. How very sad.

I think PETA, especially with the current administration would have a tough time challenging the legality of hunting in the states. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif That said , hopefully the land won't disappear over here.

I hope the Brits rebel for all they are worth. What a lovely image of horses running with hounds. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/no.gif Can they ban abandoned of wild packs of dogs from hunting? Shame.

[WhatzUp]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Cherry:
I'm just curious--what's the "sport" in chasing a fox down until it's nearly exhausted and then allowing the dogs to tear him limb from limb, or do I have that scenario mixed up with another "sport"? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

Why not just engage in drag hunts? That way both sides win.... http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I just don't understand the outrage.... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well said. I completely agree.

Yours in sport,

Lynn

[WhatzUp]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by J Swan:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Cherry:
I'm just curious--what's the "sport" in chasing a fox down until it's nearly exhausted and then allowing the dogs to tear him limb from limb, or do I have that scenario mixed up with another "sport"?

Why not just engage in drag hunts? That way both sides win....

I just don't understand the outrage.... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You have that scenario mixed up with something else. That's not foxhunting. If you participated, you'd know better than to say that.

And drag hunting is not the same as foxhunting. If you knew anything about either of those - you'd not say that either. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What is foxhunting then ?

Yours in sport,

Lynn

[fernie fox]

I think you will find A LOT of

""D R A G ""

hunting starting right now. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

[Jumphigh83]

It is called "put to ground" or "at bay" ...our hounds do not rip anything limb from limb..please educate youself before making blanket statements which testify to your ignorance.

[J Swan]

The manner in which a pack of hounds work together, the science and art of breeding and training a pack of hounds, watching the hounds speak, honor, work out a line, follow their quarry, seeing a fox from time to time, learning how the fox lives, breeds, spends its time, what it eats, directly participating in the natural world, all those things but scratch the surface when talking about foxhunting.

Running the fox to exhaustion, tearing it from limb to limb - those statements demonstrate ignorance and they are inflammatory and intended to solicit an entirely emotional response.

However, it is not true. If you really knew anything about foxhunting - by participating - you'd know that.

When we call it "sport" we use that word in its purest sense. Fairness. Honor. Ethics. Cooperation. Some might call "sport" only those activities that are games. Soccer. Football. Tennis. However, when the foxhunter talks about "sport" we are not talking about a game that you watch on tv or carpool the kids to.

I would not condescend to say that you can't understand unless you do it. But really, if you would really like to become educated about what really goes on - please ask any foxhunter, or even go to a tack store and buy a book or video.

What will surprise you the most about foxhunters in general is the level of commitment they have to the outdoors, rural life, the environment and conservation. And their love of animals. It's just that we participate in an aspect of the natural world that some may not fully understand.

So I encourage you, and any other non-foxhunter, to learn both sides of the story.

[BarbB]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Lookout:
It's not about animal rights at all. It's class warfare. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It IS partly a class war.....but PETA and ALF have been diligently working toward this for 20+ years. And stirring up 'class war' emotions is just one more tool in their arsenal.
Don't kid yourself that this just erupted because of war between the Houses in Parliment.
http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/no.gif

[Trakehner]

Class warfare in a socialist country...now there's a surirse.

PETA and scum like them may have pushed for this , but nothing would have happened if the attitudes of city sensitivities and "those nasty country clods" wasn't already in England.

England is down the tubes and a lost country, only the body is still warm. Ireland still remembers history and has freedoms...better hunting anyway.

[WhatzUp]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by J Swan:
The manner in which a pack of hounds work together, the science and art of breeding and training a pack of hounds, watching the hounds speak, honor, work out a line, follow their quarry, seeing a fox from time to time, learning how the fox lives, breeds, spends its time, what it eats, directly participating in the natural world, all those things but scratch the surface when talking about foxhunting.

Running the fox to exhaustion, tearing it from limb to limb - those statements demonstrate ignorance and they are inflammatory and intended to solicit an entirely emotional response.

However, it is not true. If you really knew anything about foxhunting - by participating - you'd know that.

When we call it "sport" we use that word in its purest sense. Fairness. Honor. Ethics. Cooperation. Some might call "sport" only those activities that are games. Soccer. Football. Tennis. However, when the foxhunter talks about "sport" we are not talking about a game that you watch on tv or carpool the kids to.

I would not condescend to say that you can't understand unless you do it. But really, if you would really like to become educated about what really goes on - please ask any foxhunter, or even go to a tack store and buy a book or video.

What will surprise you the most about foxhunters in general is the level of commitment they have to the outdoors, rural life, the environment and conservation. And their love of animals. It's just that we participate in an aspect of the natural world that some may not fully understand.

So I encourage you, and any other non-foxhunter, to learn both sides of the story. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

J Swan,

Thank you for your reply, I do appreciate your
response and have a better understanding. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif

Thank you also for eloquently responding ... and
refraining from any implication that I am "ignorant",
or "if I knew anything" or "please educate yourself"
comments ad nasuem as others have written ... I will
not condescend to respond to those statements.


Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

Yours in sport,

Lynn

[M. O'Connor]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> quote:
Originally posted by Cherry:
&lt;&lt;I'm just curious--what's the "sport" in chasing a fox down until it's nearly exhausted and then allowing the dogs to tear him limb from limb, or do I have that scenario mixed up with another "sport"?&gt;&gt;

Why not just engage in drag hunts? That way both sides win....

I just don't understand the outrage....


Originally posted by JSwan:

&lt;&lt;You have that scenario mixed up with something else. That's not foxhunting. If you participated, you'd know better than to say that.&gt;&gt;

And drag hunting is not the same as foxhunting. If you knew anything about either of those - you'd not say that either. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thanks for that description JSwan...but I'm still not 'getting it,' I guess...

So...JSwan, please explain what does happen to the fox. If the notion that it gets torn limb from limb is not accurate...what IS?

I'm one who has never experienced riding to the hounds...and I have to admit to being puzzled. But not about the resistance on the part of foxhunters to the ban, or about why some would seek to ban hunting. Eventually, sooner or later, the fox dies as a result of pursuit, right? The proponants of the hunting ban don't want the fox to die, I guess (whatever they feel about class, that's their arguement, isn't it?).

Well, I don't think it's fair to those who don't 'get it' for you to be so glib about how we 'can't understand' anyway.

I don't 'get it' either way...why can't the hounds simply be muzzled? (I've asked this before, and the answer was: the muzzle would get caught on things...well, ok what about a breakaway muzzle?). Muzzled hounds, fox can't get torn apart by hounds, fox doesn't die. Seems ok to me. What would be wrong with this from a foxhunting point of view?

[J Swan]

I can only speak for myself, of course - but I think the problem I have with the description of "running to exhaustion and being torn from limb to limb" is that it is not accurate. Foxes are caught on occasion, and we ARE hunting the fox, although the focus is on the chase.

I should also point out that although foxhunting in its current form is now banned in England, unless I'm mistaken hunting with a brace of hounds is not, as are other forms of hunting. It is very much targeted to the whole "class" thing.

I am honestly not trying to be glib. I remember a comment someone made in the dressage forum about abuse - it went something like this. A person walks in and sees a lady holding her horse and beating it with a whip. Another person sees the same thing and sees a horseman teaching piaffe in-hand. Different things, surely.

Meaning - people's preconceived notions and perceptions can lead to the wrong conclusion. I merely suggest that in the context of this discussion, this may be the case.

In foxhunting in the US, the odds are in favor of the fox - as is the case of hunting any prey animal. A fox with an established territory has many places to run. At any time, they can run to ground. Sometimes they do. Often - they do not. However, the fox is always the one who decides. No one is permitted to turn a fox or do anything that might cause the fox to do anything not in its nature.

Fox do get killed. A kill happens when the fox is old, sick or makes a very big mistake. Just like in nature. And to be frank, there is not much left. Just like any predator who kills a prey animal. But the fox is not mauled to death. Death is instantaneous. I would not want a hound to be muzzled - I think the chances are very good that when they do get a fox - the animal would be left severely injured - not dead, because the hound cannot kill his prey the way nature intended. No one wants that.

My answer is not supposed to change your opinion - I respect it. I wish you could see and hear what I do. I wish I could put it into words. Because it is so very much different from the way it is portrayed in the media. If I could make you understand how wonderful it is to see and hear a well trained pack of hounds in full cry, the view of a fox calmly walking the top rail of a fence - thwarting the hounds yet again - the sound of hooves thundering, the misty mornings, the beauty, wonder and awe I experience being so close and participating in the natural world - but I can't. Words fail me.

I can only suggest that you visit a hunt, ask questions, read a memoir about foxhunting, or talk to foxhunters. You may still be against foxhunting - which again - I respect - but perhaps you could understand more about what goes on?

[Glimmerglass]

The Daily Local (Philadelphia, PA) (http://www.zwire.com/site/printerFriendly.cfm?brd=1671&dept_id=17782&newsid=13410011)

11/21/2004
Locals react to Britain's fox hunting ban

DAVID BERNARD, Staff Writer

A recently enacted and highly controversial ban on fox hunting in Great Britain has even evoked reactions across the Atlantic from local equestrian experts.

However, a state official said such a ban was unlikely to happen in Pennsylvania.

"We do not believe that such an effort would be successful in Pennsylvania," said Jerry Feaser of the state’s Game Commission.

The British ban was passed Thursday when members of the elected House of Commons overruled the opposition of the appointed House of Lords.

While the ban does not prohibit the shooting of foxes, it does bar all hunting with trained hounds, including the pursuit of rabbits and deer. It is scheduled to take effect in February.

The debate over whether to outlaw a popular country sport that opponents view as animal cruelty has divided the European nation for at least a decade.

Fox hunting enthusiast Nancy Hannum, of East Marlborough, saw the "very emotional" issue in terms of urban growth versus rural traditions.

"Why should the urban population of England try to destroy a sport that has been going on in rural places since forever?" she asked. "I don’t understand how fox hunting can be any different than rugby, soccer, cricket or any other sport going on in England."

In Britain, opponents of fox hunting argue its cruelty on grounds that the hounds kill the foxes by tearing them apart.

Supporters, on the other hand, note that trained hounds kill the foxes quickly, as opposed to hunting with firearms or fish hooks, which sometimes only wound an escaping animal.

"If it was not for fox hunting ... the farmers would be doing much more cruelty to foxes" with traps and shotguns, Hannum said.

Supporters also point to fox hunting’s importance to rural Britain’s culture and economy.

For some Pennsylvanian fox hunters, the rules of the game are different.

"From our point of view, (the ban) is nonsense over here," said Edward Theurkauf, master of fox hounds at the Pickering Hunt Club. "First, we don’t kill the foxes the way they do over there. We just chase them. ... We don’t have to kill them."

He said he also felt that the ban was based more in culture than in compassion.

"It’s not necessarily an animal rights issue over there," he said. "It’s a political issue" between the Labor Party, which currently leads the House of Commons, and the Conservative Party.

While American animal rights groups have raised the idea of banning fox and other game hunting in the U.S., Feaser said he hadn’t heard of any efforts taking root in Harrisburg.

"Our legislation has made it clear through various votes they’ve had that they’re supportive of Pennsylvanians’ right to hunt, fish and trap," he said.

Pennsylvania is second only to Texas in its number of licensed hunters, Feaser said.

He also cited a 1998 study that counted the economic impact of Pennsylvania’s hunting activities at $4.8 billion and 45,000 jobs.

"I’m sure those numbers have only increased," he said.

In Britain, the fox hunting issue sparked an enormous protest in September 2002 when 400,000 hunting supporters marched through central London in what was billed as one of Britain’s largest protests in 150 years.

In September 2004, five hunting enthusiasts stormed onto the House of Commons floor as lawmakers debated the ban. Some 10,000 protesters massed outside Parliament that day and some clashed with police in riot gear.

After the ban’s passage, supporters of the ban pledged to openly defy it and to fight it in court. Conservative Party officials promised to repeal the ban if they win control of the House of Commons in elections anticipated for next year.

[vineyridge]

It's not just foxhunting; it's beagling and bassetting and coursing with sight hounds. Yet they continue to allow falconry, which is ridiculous.

Foxhunters from Britain say that, since fox are considered vermin by farmers, if organized hunting of vermin with hounds is no longer allowed, farmers will have no incentive to permit drag hunting on their property. And finding willing landowners is the hardest thing a hunt in America has to do.

If your Jack Russell kills a rat in your barn with your permission, it is possible that you could be prosecuted under the ban.

Another horrible thing about the way the legislation is worded is that police may arrest when they have reasonable suspicion that people are "about to hunt with dogs". How will the police tell drag hunting from foxhunting?

[Jumphigh83]

So it is OK for non foxhunters to make ignorant statements about the hunt but it is not OK for those of us who are familiar with the sport to point out the same? It is fine for you cast aspersions on hunting but we should calmly try to educate you after an inflammatory comment? In a smaller realm I guess we can see why the prob,em is so devastating in England.
I have seen our hounds surround a coyote and then look to the huntsman (woman to those of you who need PC) as if to ask "Now what"? The coyote walked away and the hounds were rewarded with "cookies" (dog bones) carried by the wheel whip to reward their "kill".
Doesn't anyone wonder where "It isnt the kill it is the thrill of the case.." comes from?

[Glimmerglass]

I hope the Blair government is prepared to find new lands for military training exercises. The cooperation of many hunt and farm lands to allow for the British Armed Forces to train on private property is most certainly in doubt.

Already some articles have suggested that farmers are threatening to stop the armed forces training on their land - good. I certainly think repercussions should be felt.

[Magnolia]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> I'm mistaken hunting with a brace of hounds is not, as are other forms of hunting. It is very much targeted to the whole "class" thing.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

So hounds can still go kill fox? Just not with people on horseback following? Huh? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

Very bizarre....

[J Swan]

Double check me on this - but I think I'm correct. They can still be shot, gassed and trapped. Falconry is not forbidden.

It is kinda weird. The more I learn about the fight in the UK, the less I understand it. Because it's a glob of politics, animal rights, socio-economic stuff that I just can't relate to because I don't live there.

Maybe they should have called it a horse ban - since it seems the major difference is that you can't ride?

[M. O'Connor]

&lt;&lt;hound to be muzzled - I think the chances are very good that when they do get a fox - the animal would be left severely injured - not dead, because the hound cannot kill his prey the way nature intended. No one wants that.&gt;&gt;

? How would they even injure it if they were muzzled? Especially if they were so obedient as Betsy describes?

Understand, I am simply asking...

&lt;&lt;So it is OK for non foxhunters to make ignorant statements about the hunt but it is not OK for those of us who are familiar with the sport to point out the same? It is fine for you cast aspersions on hunting but we should calmly try to educate you after an inflammatory comme&gt;&gt;

I'm thinking this must not have been directed at anyone here because I haven't seen any inflamatory comments? Just questions.

I am neither for nor against. I'm a certified carnavoire myself. (But I draw the line at killing anything with my teeth.) I don't think we really need to worry about hunting bans here just yet. What with all those red states, trucks, gunracks, and labs. Heck, we can't even get anti assault weapons banned again. That "hunt tourism" thread is interesting though. Especially with the dollar in the currency cellar.

[Albion]

Dogs don't kill things by ripping it slowly from limb to limb - they break the neck. Which is why most dogs, when playing with toys, do the violent head shake thing. Having watched various barn dogs & my own terriers kill assorted vermin (usually of the miniature variety - mice & rats), it's a quick whipping back & forth of the head & the animal is dead very quickly.

I, personally, would rather have my neck snapped & die relatively painlessly, as oppossed to being gassed, poisoned, or shot & left to die a long, slow, painful death. I've heard more than enough stories of trapped animals slowly starving to death - or, in the case of the old-school "jaw" type traps, chewing off their own limbs to get away - that I think death at the hands of a pack of hounds is a far preferable way to die. FWIW, I've never been hunting - but I don't think this ban is going to do anything kind for the foxes (or the farmers) in the UK. They're vermin & will be killed somehow.

[vineyridge]

Small anecdote--
I once had a Weimaraner. She was a mighty huntress, indeed. One afternoon, I watched her sitting very quietly by a tall clump of grass. After a bit, she disturbed the clump and a cotton tail jumped out. She caught it instantly and bit its head off.

Had a killer dalmatian, and I watched her break the necks of rats in the barn. One quick shake, and the rat was dead.

That's what dogs do, folks. They are killers by nature, and they kill quickly. Cats, on the other hand, play with their quarry before they kill it. Cats are cruel.

In Britain, the huntsmen carry guns and shot the fox when it's trapped or gone to ground. It's very rare that the hounds even get to it.

[BravAddict]

I think the term "cruel" is unfair. They're just animals, and aren't really capable of being cruel, as it were. If I'm not mistaken, the "toying" with prey is a maternal behavior (although I know both sexes do it) and is how female cats help their kittens to learn how to hunt. Dogs do this as well. Hunting dogs, though, I think their instincts are focused, as others have pointed out, to kill their food quickly.
I was just following along out of curiousity. I also don't know much about fox hunting so I enjoy the new info. Drag hunting...is that just chasing the fox for a while?
What is the significance of muzzling?

[cbv]

From someone that has never fox hunted and has no dog in this fight...but I am a wildlife biologist and have this observation. I have seen probably 4 dead foxes in the past month--- including one that had a den on my farm that my non-hunting dogs loved to check out each day on our walks---dead by the side of, or in the middle of, various roads on my daily trek to work and back.

I don't know how many foxes are killed each year foxhunting with horses. I live in a rural eastern Va county where apparently the locals hunt them with hounds but no horses as well...and I have no idea the kill rate for that. However, my guess is far more foxes are killed by cars each year than by hunters, and those numbers will only increase as the urban continues its march.

One further comment. Folks that are proponents of foxhunting can react however they wish to questions and comments from those that don't. However, it is my experience that to win friends and influence people, reasoned explanation is far more valuable to your cause. Especially when your talking to an audience that has at least some common ground (horses and in most instances nature and open space).

[appyhunter]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BravAddict:
I was just following along out of curiousity. I also don't know much about fox hunting so I enjoy the new info. Drag hunting...is that just chasing the fox for a while?
What is the significance of muzzling? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

A drag hunt does not follow a live animal. A scent 'trail' is laid for the hounds to follow.

I believe the idea was a muzzled hound could not bite and kill. Sort of like asking a human track competitor to run with duct tape across the mouth, I would think.

A lot of people are going to loose their jobs over this, and a lot of hounds, and likely horses will loose theirs also. In the case of the hounds and horses many will likely loose their lives. And it won't save one single fox from being 'eradicated'.

[J Swan]

cbv - I do hope I haven't been too curt - if I have, it wasn't my intention and I apologize to anyone I might have offended.

I'm glad that non-hunters are asking questions - I think it's important to correct misconceptions, or offer a different perspective.

Like cbv, most of the foxes I have seen in my life have been run over by cars. Most hunts go as very long time, even years, without a kill. Cars and sprawl are a much bigger menace to wildlife than a pack of hounds ever will be.

To answer M.O'Connors question she has to understand I'm a bit out of my league here, but will offer my thoughts on the muzzles. From what I've seen in the hunt field- several things come to mind. First, even with breakaways, the terrain hounds traverse is very difficult, and hounds get hung up all the time. But they don't just sit there. Hounds will thrash about until they are freed because the pack instinct is so darn strong they cannot stand being left behind. It's almost primal.

I also would be concerned about a hound cornering a fox and not being able to kill it properly - but holding it down with his paw, or rolling it - or somehow causing it prolonged suffering since it cannnot kill it cleanly.
There would also be concerns in my mind about hounds tangling with something and having to end up protecting themselves (bear) and not being able to, that sort of thing. I'd also be worried about a hound getting lost and not being able to eat or drink properly. They do get lost from time to time.

But again - I'm kind of reaching here so you may want to ask more experienced hunters that question.

As far as conservation and nature - you won't find more committed people than foxhunters. And not just because we want to hunt fox. But because we know how important a healthy ecology is. Many of us are farmers, landowners, avid gardeners, animals lovers, etc. We get to go places and see aspects of nature that are truly wonderful and awe inspiring - we'd like to keep as much of it around as possible. Warts and all.

[bird4416]

To add to J Swan's post, a muzzle would affect the hound's ability to smell.

[tobruk]

In over 30 years of association with various hunts I can count on one hand the number of times I ever remember killng a fox. "Sly like a fox." They're pretty clever animals.

[Chaser]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by vineyridge:
Small anecdote--

In Britain, the huntsmen carry guns and shot the fox when it's trapped or gone to ground. It's very rare that the hounds even get to it. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Foxes are often caught above ground in English foxhunting and killed by the hounds.

I am told that the first hound makes a quick, clean kill. I haven't seen it, so can't comment. However, even if this didn't happen every time, hounds are so much bigger than a fox that it must be a quick end. Dogs don't play with prey like cats.

Unlike hunting in the US, in England the point of foxhunting is to kill foxes.

Banning hunting does not save the life of a single fox. It is still permitted to gas, snare and shoot them - indiscriminate methods which account for sickly and healthy foxes alike.

This is because there are huge numbers of foxes and they must be controlled. They have no natural predator and abundant food.

When foxhunting stopped during the foot and mouth crisis, people went out lamping instead. I wonder how many foxes were killed outright and how many slunk off wounded to die slowly?

More foxes have been killed in Scotland since foxhunting on horseback was banned there.

This is about class - based not on money but on values. It is not based on animal welfare. The anti-hunting brigade see it as payback for the coal pit closures in the 1980's. They see it as way to get back at 'toffs'.

It is also based on the idea that hunters take pleasure in the kill.

I do not hunt, and have no desire to do so, but I know the arguments in favour of foxhunting because I read Horse & Hound which is pro-hunting. However, the hunters have done an exceedingly poor job in educating the general public.

Did you know that some leading members of the League against Cruel Sports have changed their mind when they understood the facts, and now do not want to see hunting banned? Not surprisingly, they are no longer members of that group. I rarely see this mentioned in news articles or debates.

Drag hunting is no proper alternative. Foxhunts are permitted to cross land because they perform a service for the farmer in killing the foxes. Why would any farmer allow a bunch of people on horses to trample over their fields if they don't dispose of vermin? It's bad enough when you are a single person out for a quiet hack on stubble!

Possibly there might be some draghunting (following a scent laid down by a human runner), but it is not the same and the farmers will expect payment, making the sport more elitist.

Remember also that farms are tiny compared to US spreads. A draghunt would have to pay numerous landowners to have enough room to run several lines.

Edited to add: angling will never be banned, because it is seen as a working class sport.

[monalisa]

Better watch out. Now that they have England, the US is next!

[Killian]

JSwan - welldone & wellsaid!

[jetjocky]

Since so many have made excellent points regarding the ban as a form of class warfare, maybe we should also ask ourselves what we can do as individuals to better educate non-horse people on our way of life. The snobby "horses are for rich people" thing persists in the U.S. as well. But I wonder how much horse sports cost compared with, say, owning a bass boat, or racing a stock car, both of which could be argued as more "blue collar" hobbies.

I for one, take the education thing to heart. I always smile and wave while out riding and go around and introduce myself through the neighborhood to get permission to cross people's property. When I do, I always offer to sign a release because I'm not interested in suing someone for letting me ride across their property.

When I was more closely associated with hunting, I frequently invited people to come out and car follow. Being around hunting and hunting people is the best way for someone to begin to understand what it's about. I also tell folks that I learned more about nature through my association with foxhunting than I did in two years as a biology major in college.

However, I think the biggest obstacle in getting folks to understand the beauty of a life with horses and among nature is that it ususally can't be accomplished in 20 minutes. It takes a little time and the willingness, with hunting anyway, to pay attention to what's around you, and I think that is a vanishing skill.

[Dr Al]

A muzzled hound wouln't be able to open or breath as well during or after a run. I dont think it would be possible for a hound to hunt for long, or the pack to work together if they could not speak. Panting is essential for a hound to rapidly recover from exertion and to cool down via panting as they cannot sweat.

[Killian]

Jetjocky - http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif

Dr. Al - good points.

[Luckington Lane]

Well said, J Swan.

Thank you for your intelligent, reasoned discussion of a politicized, mis-understood but wholly wonderful sport.

My hear goes out to the British whose lives are clearly hurt by the ban.

[Heinz 57]

A note on the muzzles, as far as the argument about breathing - greyhounds race fully muzzled and are able to breathe quite well during and after the chase.

However, the other anti-muzzling arguments still stand.

[Killian]

Heinz - How long is a greyhound's race & how often do they race per day? Hounds can hunt pretty steady for anywhere from 3 - 8 hours, depending on the day. A muzzle would definitely be a hindrance for them.

[J Swan]

The other day a whip came across a deer hunter while we were hunting one of our fixtures. Turns out they chatted for a good long while, and he expressed a great deal of interest in how we hunt our hounds. Luckily enough, this whip just happens to be a highly intelligent, gracious horsewoman and really was able to educate him.

It's about educating other hunters, too. Because we're all in the same boat. Deerhunters are accused of killing "Bambi", for example.

For those who liked what I posted, thank you. But I often feel like I'm preaching - which is really obnoxious and rude. I just really wish non-hunters could see through my eyes because words are just not adequate.

You know - if occurred to me today as I was chasing my damned Beagle through the woods that foxhunters can appear intimidating. Know what I mean? Think of it from Harry Homeowner's perspective. He's driving along in his sedan - out of nowhere some guy on a big horse pops out in front of him looking like George Washington, asks him to slow down, all of a sudden there's another George Washington lookalike blowing on a horn, big smelly dogs barking, and a whole bunch of people looking like George Washington on big huge horses galloping by. I mean - come on - it's archaic! The guy must think he's been sent back in time or something. And people on horses look intimidating. They look down on you. The horse looks down on you. It smells funny. There's all sorts of mysterious geegaws on the horse and rider.

And everyone just looks like something from 200 years ago. Completely alien. Arcane.

Now I ask you - how do we get around that? How does one educate the average person? Because I'd really like to set a good example.

[Luckington Lane]

If only...

If only it were possible to get all naysayers up in the saddle to experience the simple fun of the the ride.

I think that would change minds very quickly.

[Elghund2]

J swan: One of the ways to get support of the local populace is to be gracious. When we have to get on the roads, we make it a point to wave to the people in the cars, people we pass who are out in their yards, etc.

I've had a little boy come up to my horse while we were at a check and asked to pet him. I let him.

I think you have to be thinking PR all the time. Here in Loudoun the pro-development groups are always using the term "elitist fox hunting wealthy land owners". Being friendly and courteous doesn't cost a thing and is very easy to do.

I know a lot of the horse groups are making a push to get horses and people out to Pucellevilles holiday parade on December 11th.

[J Swan]

Elghund2 - what are you doing up so early!? I'm getting ready to go hunting - but it's raining in Fauquier. Boo hoo. No 4 wheel drive on the truck.

You're right - I know we all try to hard to be gracious - I just kind of feel like the Queen waving to the peasants as I ride by. Not with long time residents - just the urban refugees. You can tell them apart, usually.

Last fall I wrote an article for the CDCTA newsletter about foxhunting camp - trying to get more horse people interested in hunting - to complement their chosen sport - not replace it. It was well received - but it would be great to reach a wider audience. But then - you risk attracting unwanted attention.

Foxhunting needs to be demystified; dressage does too for that matter - but dressage is "safe" in that it's arena work. So I guess one of the things we need to do is get regular kids some xc experience.

Parades are a wonderful idea.

[gothedistance]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by J Swan:
Now I ask you - how do we get around that? How does one educate the average person? Because I'd really like to set a good example. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Piece of cake. You say you're a reenactor from the Revolutionary War era reenacting George's best loved riding sport.

Then you can launch into a full blown historical perspective of the sport and George's imported foxhounds (which Martha always complained about hanging around the house and getting on the furniture -- which she also said about the French guests who couldn't seen to remember they needed to leave before the winter set in and froze over the river keeping them hanging around Mt. Vernon until the following spring messing up the carpets with their muddy boots and making rude remarks about her cook's cooking)

And it would be the absolute truth, too. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

[gothedistance]

I'll be driving my pair of Welsh ponies in Purcellville's parade!! I just sent the organizer my logo to put in the program, so ... we're "official".

I plan on dressing my guys up in those cute fuzzy reindeer antlers, hang their jingle bells on them, and Christmas ribbon-wrap my reins. I've got to get together a nice outfit for myself -- perhaps as Mrs. Claus --and get two of my neighbor's kids to ride with me dressed in those funny elf hats, plus my two "walkers" dressed in holiday "elf" finery. I'm going to pile the center of the phaeton with Christmas presents, and have peppermints the kids can throw to the crowds.

It'll be a hoot!

[vineyridge]

I'm glad other people's foxhounds get on the furniture. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[Killian]

What an interesting turn this thread has taken. And I think there might be something useful for others found here.

Elghund - you're absolutely right about the PR factor. My background is in public relations & marketing so I can speak from experience. When I was hunting with a club on the Eastern Shore in the late 80's/early 90's we made a point of marketing ourselves to the general public. Why? For the very reasons you speak of. The more folks knew about us, the more they understood & accepted what we were doing & why, the more lands opened up for us, the more patrons & donations we received, & more - it was win-win for relatively little effort. And of course, always gracious & correct behavior in public, as we were all ambassadors for our club & our sport.

The press & the public was invited to our Opening Hunts, Blessing of the Hounds, horse shows, steeplechase events, historical parades we participated in - anything we could think of to get our name & our sport out there & educate people.

We used to be able to hack from the kennels over to a nearby historic estate & park where all were invited to see the spectacle & pageantry of the Opening Hunt & the Blessing of the Hounds. The blessing took place, stirrup cups were passed & our Master gave a little history lesson on foxhunting in general & locally, & the hunstman displayed some houndwork. Afterwards we rode off & hunted for the day.

We not only got local tv coverage, we got print coverage as well. It helped that that was my "job" as a member & that I wrote features for local publications already. My goal was year round coverage of our events, with the focus on the start of the season each year.

At the time, some people used to wonder why we did this("hey, just tooting your own horn?" or "don't call attention to what we do, there are people out there who don't like hunting"), but I think the effort paid off in the long run & the club continues going strong.

JSwan - your description of how the public may view us is priceless! http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif

[jetjocky]

Some really great ideas here. We need to be proactive, because with the "win" against hunting in England, that may embolden the animal rights folks on this side of the pond.

The best thing we can do, and it looks like plenty of folks on this board have a good game plan, is educate, educate, educate. Hats off to the folks doing so.

[Magnolia]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> You know - if occurred to me today as I was chasing my damned Beagle through the woods that foxhunters can appear intimidating. Know what I mean? Think of it from Harry Homeowner's perspective. He's driving along in his sedan - out of nowhere some guy on a big horse pops out in front of him looking like George Washington, asks him to slow down, all of a sudden there's another George Washington lookalike blowing on a horn, big smelly dogs barking, and a whole bunch of people looking like George Washington on big huge horses galloping by. I mean - come on - it's archaic! The guy must think he's been sent back in time or something. And people on horses look intimidating. They look down on you. The horse looks down on you. It smells funny. There's all sorts of mysterious geegaws on the horse and rider.

And everyone just looks like something from 200 years ago. Completely alien. Arcane.

Now I ask you - how do we get around that? How does one educate the average person? Because I'd really like to set a good example. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sounds like something I'd pay to see at Williamsburg! I'd think it would be fun and interesting..... not threatening. But then when I was in Utah I got a kick out of seeing cows in the road.

[race_run_jump]

I hear mentioned somewhere that a hunt was involved in a search and rescue - some of the whips went out mounted to look for a lost .. something or someone, I forget. Maybe a nice offer to make to the local squads - as hunting people know the countryside really well.

[J Swan]

gothedistance - remember to get pictures for the COTH holiday pet thingamabob.

Just got back in from hunting - we had a nice talk with a deerhunter coming in. For some reason the wildlife was just digging in - probably because of the incoming weather. It was very nice to talk to him about his day, what he saw, and in turn he told us where he'd seen some fox, where some barbed wire was, etc. Very nice.

Then we went past the county dump and waved at all the trash guys dumping stuff. Got a lot of big smiles.

Probably because they thought we looked like Horatio Gates and George Washington. We even had Redcoats! Sic semper tyrannis!

I tell you - you gotta look at this from a nonhunters perspective. We look too weird to be real.

Y'all are right. We must be ambassadors. I'd love to write a guidebook for nonhunters or car followers or something. Something lighthearted.

Another good Georgie anecdote (have no idea if it's true) but he also brought the Basset Hound to American. Folks called them "Virginia bench-legged beagles".

We got a view of an enormous red fox today. Then I fell off my horse. Horse thinks I'm an idiot. I KNOW I'm an idiot. Came home with my tail between my legs.

Humbling sport, this. Very humbling. Rich and poor look alike when laying on the ground covered in mud while fellow hunters hold up scorecards.

[Killian]

JSwan - What a fun day (except for the fall). So true - horses humble us all!

I think talking with other hunters is a great idea & also brings you more opportunities. Harking back to the club on the Eastern Shore, we formed alliances with local beaglers & other hunters, which opened up more territories & educated us in their sports as well. We planned a few special informal days where we "combined forces" & hunted fox together - an interesting experience to be sure - & we supported each others functions.

I really like the idea of sharing information & the more friends & allies you have the better.

[alabama3870]

I have to say, for the record, that I agree with everything that JSwan has mentioned so eloquently.

As for the numbers of fox (or in our case here, coyote) that are actually caught per year; here are the rough numbers from what I've seen; Hunting roughly 3 times a week from October till April gives you 84 hunts. Out of that number I would say our hunt club has had an average of 5 kills a season and we get on a run or see at least one coyote each of those times. Since that is a less than 1% "success" rate you can see that the odds are DEFINITELY in favour of the prey.
Also, an interesting side note. I've read that since the ban passed in Scotland, MORE fox have been killed, not less - as the anti's would like to have everyone believe. (No, I can't remember exactly where I read that but I'll see if I can find it)

[Painted Wings]

Geez, we haven't had a kill in years, I think it's almost 20 now. Hounds go out 40-50 times a season. How 'bout them odds.

By the way Alabama, by my math 5 kills out of 84 is a 6% success rate. I would think however that most hunts are more like ours and go years between kills.

[RoyalTRider]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>If you participated, you'd know better than to say that.

And drag hunting is not the same as foxhunting. If you knew anything about either of those - you'd not say that either. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And I believe she made it adundantely clear that she neither hunts nor thinks she is some expert, so my goodness gracious.

[RoyalTRider]

And yikes... I just saw the other attacking posts about that one. I mean, come on. She didn't pretend WHATSOEVER to know what she was talking about, she stated a question.

[RoyalTRider]

J Swan- WELL SAID speech there on the first page!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> So it is OK for non foxhunters to make ignorant statements about the hunt but it is not OK for those of us who are familiar with the sport to point out the same? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

She wasn't making an "ignorant statement." An "ignorant statement" is "Oh yes, I have been riding Grand Prix for seven years, I am such an expert... wait a minute! What's a counter-canter! You cannot canter on the wrong lead!" She made it perfectly crystal she had never done it before.

Now, nervous as I am, I am going to make an "ignorant statement" of my own- that is, I am going to ask a question, and I have no idea about foxhunting. This is not some thinly vieled attack; I honestly have no idea.

If sometimes the fox hunts kill foxes, then why don't people just follow scent trails so nothing is ever killed? Is it because it takes away part of the art of the chase? If the sport is about the breeding, the training, the studying, then what is the difference between chasing something live or doing the same thing with a scent trail?

All from someone who does not believe it should be banned. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

PS- Forgive me short little posts when they come two or three in a row; I never know how long I am going to be on so I respond but sometimes end up staying on longer.

[gothedistance]

RTR - Some people do follow pre-sent trails. In hunting terminology they're called "drag hunts" because the "quarry" is a bag of scent (either urine or some other type of heavy odor) that is laid down in a line across the countryside. Hounds that are used to a live quarry (which puts down scent from it's paws) won't follow a drag. The hounds have to be taught to follow a drag scent.

In general, it's more time-consuming to arrange to have a scent dragged cross country -- there has to be the agreement on where the line will go, how often it will be lifted (to check the hounds) and how far it will go before it is terminated. It's very predictable for the most part. Admittedly some people really enjoy it when the "quarry" takes them on a pre-ordained "chase" through the best countryside the area has to offer.

However, it's rather like planting decoys for a bird dog. Hard to get enthused about it. At least live birds can be flushed which is far more exciting and satisfactory to the hunter, and provides the validity for the breeding program to produce a good working dog with a good nose.

On that same note a live hunt has the thrill and uncertainty of not knowing if or where the quarry will appear, if the hounds will be able to hold the scent, where the quarry will elect to go, or for how far before it either goes to ground or casts the hounds off the scent.

The very unpredictability of finding and following live game is what offers the thrill in modern American foxhunting where the object is to find and follow, not kill. The quarry is very intelligent, very resourcefull, and very attuned to it's own territory. It knows the lay of the land intimately -- far better than the hounds -- knows where all the escape routes are, and can elect to either play the chase game, or say "no" and dive into the nearest hole. The hounds have to have the best breeding to produce noses that can scout, find, and hold a scent -- be it cold, warm, or scalding hot -- hark to the others in the pack who are opening or leading, and work as a tight-knit group rather than individuals in trailing the scent to it's conclusion. There is something that stirs the blood and raises one to the heights of thrilling abandon to gallop behind a beautifully working pack of running hounds singing a melody that reached down into your very soul.

Regarding killing the fox -- historically, and not too long ago (1930-40's) it was still appropriate for country dwellers to consider the fox a thieving chicken-killing vermin, and hunt it for a kill. But that's now gone by the wayside. (Less chickens being kept in our far more cosmopolitian "countryside" I suppose). I know a great many huntsmen who absoutely do not want their hounds to kill because then (as I've been told) the hound becomes too keen for blood, runs too hard, and won't hunt well with the pack. I remember the huntsman from Casanova Hunt saying to a group of wannabe hunters that some hounds will spend their whole lives following the scent, and never once see the fox.

Interesting, isn't it?

Does that help answer some of your questions?

[RoyalTRider]

Yes! http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif Thank you. I espically appreciate your kindness! I love wandering over to forums and learning about the sports which they cover, and nothing makes me more interested to learn than posts like that! I will be lurking around this forum more often. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif

[J Swan]

RTR - I don't remember where I read this - but someone likened the difference between drag hunting and foxhunting to masturbation vs. sex.

Sorry if it's risque!

And I'm the one who made the somewhat curt comment - but I didn't mean it the way it sounded. I apologized later on.

Please wander over to the hunting forum as much as you want. Bring some friends. Ask questions. We're all horsemen, and though our disciplines are different we do have that in common. And the more we can demystify foxhunting and educate people about it the better.

And you know what else? It's totally and completely fascinating to watch a pack of hounds work. I've belonged to a footpack of Bassets for years, too. They chase the cottontail.

Some people hunt to ride. Others ride to hunt. I ride to hunt.

It's not because it's fun - although I do have fun. It's about the hounds. Learning to tell what's happening far away by only the horn and hounds voices. Learning to understand the signs that nature leaves us all the time - but we've lost the ability to read.

I love nature so much that I am not content to watch it through a window. I want to be part of it; to be involved in conserving nature for its own sake.... oh - I just can't put it into words.

That may not be important to some people -but it's very important to me. And that's why I don't want foxhunting banned and I grieve for my fellow hunters in the UK.

Something wonderful has been lost.

[Pixie Dust]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by J Swan:
In foxhunting in the US, the odds are in favor of the fox <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Soooo, it's different in the UK?

[J Swan]

No - I think the odds are probably in favor of the fox too. The only major difference is that in the US we don't stop earth.

In nature - the odds are always with the prey animal. Don't take it from me - ask any naturalist, biologist, or other expert. Heck - you could probably find out by watching the Science channel or something.

[sophie]

This is a very interesting thread.
I don't know much about the ban in Britain (other than it really surprised me), but it seems to me it IS more about taxes and class than about the fox (since the fox will be hunted, still, and probably with much more "success" than when hunted with hounds).

Foxhunting IS traditionally the sport of the rich, the aristocracy. In Britain probably so, like in the rest of Europe. In France, some Hunts are VERY private and selective in who will be accepted as member. And yes, some of those members ARE snobby and arrogant. You cannot just pay a fee and be accepted as a member, like you do here in the US. It's a whole different ballgame. So I do understand why it can irk some people. I wonder if the "chasse Ã* courre" will be banned in France as well...since they can hunt deer, wild boar, hare etc. as well as fox.

I have foxhunted here in the US, mostly drag hunts, and I loved every minute of it. I found people to be very civil, courteous, just plain "nice".
Some of our local Hunts organize all kinds of activities (hunter paces, roading, trail rides) to reach out to other horse people, which is great PR.

[J Swan]

sophie - It's interesting you mention that because people may not know that many hunts in the US are private packs, not subscription. And it's not just foxhunting - lots of people form private hunt clubs.

If it's a private pack, it's very understandable that is very exclusive - after all it's all owned and paid for by one or two people who own the land, pay for hound upkeep, etc. So it's like hosting a party at your house. You wouldn't want strangers coming over and drinking all your beer.

Even subscription packs can be a bit exclusive - not because of snobbery for its own sake - but because the territory may only be able to support a certain number of members, or they'd like have some references, that sort of thing. Some hunts are closed to membership, others limit it, and still others welcome as many people as possible. It varies tremendously.

But again - this isn't particular to foxhunting. There are clubs like this for deerhunters, pigeon racers (yes it exists), duck hunters - all sorts of things. We may just not be aware of them.

If you thought about a hunt for duck hunting - think of it from that perspective - someone wants to join the group - but you'd kinda wanna make sure they knew how to handle a gun, check out their background a wee bit, perhaps be sponsored by someone, etc.

If non foxhunters could think of it from that perspective - that might help a little. But of course - there are hunts that are very very snobby and that's ok too. The world is like that.

As far as France goes - I did read that the AR folks have that country on the list. However, the French may just kick their asses big time. Don't mess with them on cultural stuff. Hunting is a cherished tradition with all the classes - foothunting in particular is very popular. Soooooo... I dunno. In this case the French may really fight back.

[Laurie@CBF]

There are lots of things that can be done to improve relations with the general public. We have a very small trail association that holds a hunter pace every year. The proceeds are donated to our local community charities (The fire department, the rescue squad, Land conservation, a needy kid at school etc).

So far our group has been well received in the community. We now have non-members volunteer on the day of our hunter pace to support the fundraiser. It is definately a fun day of interaction between horsey and non-horsey people.

[Impromptu]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Lookout:
...Can they or do they have drag hunts? At least this would preserve the countryside and continue the hounds and cross country riding traditions. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
A letter in Horse & Hound (Nov 25) read:

"Somebody needs to explain to Alun Micheal, the idiotic Labour government, the animal rights folks, and the urban masses that to go draghunting one almost needs to be on par with a decent jump jockey mounted on a trained steeplechaser.
This is no sport for the fainthearted or the number of hunt followers who, to avoid jumping fences, hack round the lanes to join up with hounds at the next covert.
Apart from that, farmers tolerate the hunt across their fields in the hope they will rid them of some foxes. Will self- respecting farmers put up with dozens of horses ridden at top speed across their fields and hedges if there is no chance of a beneficial end result?
Draghunting is a futile exercise anyway, which to a good, hard- riding sporting gent must be like kissing his sister!"

"...Because it's a glob of politics, animal rights..."
As DEFRA Minister Alun Micheal stated, " It (the ban) has nothing to do with killing foxes, it's about putting toffs in their place." When did ponyclubbers on hairy little ponies, farmers, teachers, and the rest of the working class hunt members become toffs? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif