|You are in: Talking Point|
Thursday, 28 March, 2002, 15:01 GMT
Hunting with dogs: Is delaying the decision the answer?
The government has promised six months of consultation before bringing a bill to resolve the dispute over whether to ban hunting with hounds.
Rural Affairs Minister Alun Michael told MPs the government wanted to find "common ground" but would use the Parliament Act to force through the new plans if they met obstruction in the House of Lords.
Earlier this week a huge majority of MPs backed an outright ban, but deadlock continues with the House of Lords, which voted in favour of allowing hunting to continue under new licences.
There has been speculation that the government wants to ban hunting in most areas but allow it to continue in upland areas.
Is delaying the decision the answer? What is your reaction to this week's developments?
This debate is now closed. Read your comments below.
The Scottish Parliament has
banned fox hunting and hare
coursing in just 2 years. Tony
Blair has had 5 years, and now
we learn that it is going to be
at least another 2 years before
a ban is in place. In the
meantime, many thousands
of our wild mammals are going
to endure a cruel and barbaric
death. Let's get a move on, ban
these anachronistic bloodsports,
and then get rid of the equally
anachronistic House of Lords!
Only if no hunting takes place during the consultation period. Why should foxes be ripped apart by dogs just because humans can't get their act together?
Lorna Grainge, UK
I've asked this question a few times and yet to hear a sensible answer: who exactly would be made unemployed by a hunting ban?
Class war. Satisfied?
I care not a jot one way or the other about hunting.
Could the government please make up its mind and get back to the important issues.
If the Lords agree with the Commons they are irrelevant and if the disagree they are obscene - ban the House of Lords!
Stop hunting altogether. It's a sick sport.
Fox hunting with dogs/horses should be banned. After all it's just a sport for people with nothing better to do. It's hogwash for fox hunting supporters to claim that a ban would affect their livelihoods. Farmers are heavily subsidised with our taxes - so we could start hunting farmers because they are draining our taxes so that they can go fox hunting.
Will somebody please tell me why foxhunting deserves to be banned while Tony Blair says not one word about the massive cruelty of ritual slaughter - where food animals destined for the tables of middle-eastern minority communities have their throats cut and are left to bleed to death while fully conscious - a process taking minutes rather than seconds.
Unless Tony Blair has a very good answer to this question, he will stand accused of massive hypocrisy - no doubt driven by the fact that urban minority communities are traditional Labour-supporters.
I do not really believe that the majority of the population wishes to end hunting. I think that the majority is indifferent, but if pushed into acting will support a ban. Not out of any personal convictions, but out of fear of the vociferous (and often vicious) antics of the politically motivated 'ban hunting' lobby. I think that we are well served by the House of Lords for bringing some sanity to this issue. They realise that once fox-hunting is made illegal the same lobbyists will proceed to agitate for a ban on fishing and shooting.
Delay will be worthwhile only if the debate addresses the implications of a ban for the fox. It will be gassed, poisoned and snared, all of which are less attractive options. Make no mistake, the fox is vermin and must be controlled.
Every now and then it should be allowed to go dog hunting using foxes. I think that would wake some people up.
B Turner, UK
I am a sheep farmer. Yesterday I had a fox shot on my farm as a fox was killing some of my lambs. We shot one fox, and it was reported to me that two more were hit but not killed. I now have a choice: I can leave those two foxes to a slow and painful death or I can ask the local fox hounds hunt to come here and find them so they do not suffer a slow death from gun shot wounds. What would you do? I would add that if the foxhounds are banned I will not have this option
Hunting actually benefits the balance of nature and helps prevent cruelty by keeping pest in check. Many species are on the decline
because of pest predation and loss of habitat. Habitat is controlled by man and can help diversification but if we don't maintain balance species lose out.
A good example of imbalance is the irresponsible release of mink into the wild. Animals like the water vole, coots, shrew and otter plus fish are all being pressured and predated to very low numbers by these vicious animals and the only way to prevent this imbalance is hunting in all its formats.
Attacking foxhunting, as was "reforming" the Lords is like an immature youth hitting his grandmother because he cant cope with adult life. The government cannot deal with the really difficult break down in social order in Britain: so they get really angry and break up the furniture in the home. Soon we will have nothing but broken bits of history in a rubbish tip.
Delay it by all means. Why change the habits of a governmental lifetime? Procrastination is the lifeblood of this administration - it's the only thing they do with any conviction or expertise. It's also quite difficult to do the characteristic u-turn on decisions which haven't been made, but Mr. Blair will probably contrive to manage it somehow.
R. Eynard, England
I agree in that people put too much respect on animal life rather than human. I blame Walt Disney and the fairy-like stories that are told. If foxes etc were such quaint and not vermin-like animals, why is there problems with urban foxes in places such as Bristol and London?
The BBC itself in its nature programs have shown us this.
This savage sport should be confined to the history books, and it should have happened a long time ago.
The real issue about banning dogs in chases is that a small minority in society hates the red coat class. They want to interfere in their lives anyway they can. Banning of dog chases does nothing to make life better for foxes. It is not a cruelty issue.
I do not see why we have to have the argument at all about fox hunting. This sport has been part of British history for hundreds of years. Is this yet another tradition which is going to die out? Foxes breed in great numbers so I don't see the problem in them being hunted - after all they are vermin just like squirrels. Can the protestors not see that the dogs are doing no more than the fox does to the chickens? A fox will go after a chicken and naw at it and bring it to its death in a most unkindly manner and these protestors are talking about dogs going after foxes. It beggars belief that they have no better attitude to what is a sport that many people have no problem with whatsoever. Why is this sport causing such an outcry? Do people want vermin overrunning our country? I should like a reply.
Personally I don't approve of hunting. I am a 9-year-old girl and I think it is absolutely horrifying to think of the lives of innocent animals being swept away by horrible hunters.
Too much of the debate is about the rights and wrongs of hunting. More important are the rights and wrongs of banning it. Two points: (1) Things shouldn't be banned just because they are immoral (should lying be made criminal?) (2) Things shouldn't be banned just because a majority think they should be (was it right to ban homosexual activity when a majority thought it should be?)
We in Spain laugh at you guys - you seek to ban hunting while we enjoy bull fighting! Also how many members of Parliament who voted for a ban would be the same ones wanting to make abortion even easier? Strange morality or what?
Hattie Cripps, UK
There is a high correlation between species welfare and numbers and hunting (both with hounds and guns). Hunting benefits foxes.
Foxes are nearly extinct in Germany because people shoot them as vermin. The same will happen in this country if you ban hunting.
Only foxhunters respect a close season for Foxes, between April and August, shooters do not. I shoot foxes with a rifle and hunt them with hounds. Hunting is more humane, shots often wound for the fox never to be seen again, often to die a slow lingering death. I have actual experience and know what I am talking about, unlike the Labour backbenches and those who have an Enid Blyton outlook on all creatures cuddly.
Louise Hitchcock, England
The pro Hunting people go on about providing 'A Service', 'at one with nature etc' blah, blah... why can't they just admit it and be honest and just say that it's just a 'good jolly' which gets them high as a kite.
I grew up in the country and, as a teenager, I thought foxhunting was vile and should be banned. My father disagreed.
Now, as an adult (and living in London for the past 10 years) I've come around to my father's way of thinking. Hunting is much the same as golf - tedious but if that's the way people want to waste their weekends.... Grow up and get away from your childish view of animals as cuddly toys.
Aeroplanes kill lots of birds each year but banning planes would spoil all your summer fun in Ibiza.
If the animal lovers out there really want a cause, try battery hen farming - much more unpleasant for both the chicken and the person who ends up eating the thing.
To Richard H from England, I would reply that hunting costs absolutely nothing to taxpayers as private individuals pay it all for.
I suppose the next group of people which these lefties will take on is fishermen. There again perhaps is just too many anglers for the one issue pressure groups and labour backbenchers to take on. After all it might lose more votes than it gains.
The hypocrisy of the anti-hunt lobby beggars belief.
Enjoy your Islington based dinner parties guys. May you choke on the beef.
Richard H England asks for a cost comparison of shooting and hunting and misses the point spectacularly. It costs close to £6,000 for every fox killed by mounted hunting. But that is £6,000 spent in the rural economy by followers who finance the huntsman and his hounds in exchange for an incomparable riding experience. The cost to the landowner is zero. Marksmen, on the other hand, would have to be paid by somebody.
Richard H, England
The killing of animals for pleasure purposes is wrong - end of story.
Let's have a referendum on the issue - it will take less than 6 months to sort and it will be nice to see a 90% turnout with a 80% victory for my side!
So ... The UK is going to become the next 'Euro-Disney'. Ban hunting. What's next?
Justin B., NZ/UK
I find it seriously disturbing that Scottish MPs should have a right to vote on what is now a totally English and Welsh issue. Fox hunting has been banned in Scotland without any say by English or Welsh MPs, so why should Scottish MPs have a say in England. Without the Scottish MP's voting, the vote would have been much closer, and may have changed without the guaranteed support from north of the border. If the government wants a ban on fox hunting to be accepted, why do they not ask all the (mostly Labour) Scottish MPs to abstain from this vote? If the vote is to be fair and representative, why not restrict it to English & Welsh MPs, whose vote should represent their constituents, rather than the Scottish MPs who have already seen a ban put in place where their constituencies lie?
Labour were partly elected in 1997 on a commitment to introduce an outright ban on the sadistic practices of hunting. If it fails on all other counts then let it go down in favourable in history as the party that introduced political correctness in the field and quite correctly too.
Terry Sessford, UK
I believe that a compromise should be possible but the entrenched behaviour of the largely urban labour MPs suggests that their position is not based on facts or practicalities but on prejudice. I also think it is iniquitous that the Scottish MPs should be allowed to vote on an issue that is completely irrelevant to their constituents.
The will of the majority of MPs and their constituents has been made clear on countless occasions, so I think it's about time the government stopped prevaricating and trying to carry all parties with them and just got on with banning legislation. Far from being a distraction to the other issues that the Prime Minister wants to address, I think hunting will continue to overshadow anything else that he wants to do unless he finally bites the bullet now and concludes this matter once and for all.
It is ridiculous that the ban is not a total ban. All it means is that special licenses will be given to those that can afford them or have the political clout to secure one. It is a nasty, nasty death for any animal and should be banned completely!
Stephanie Jackman, UK
The current tack adopted by the pro-hunt lobby appears to be "There are more important things to worry about". If that is the best argument that they can put forward to retain the status quo then they are showing how bankrupt they are of justifications for this abhorrent practice.
A ban must continue to be pursued mercilessly. The compromise would do nothing more than licence barbarism.
This is persecution of the minority, an infringement of civil liberties. I would have been more impressed if there had been a full House to debate and listen. There were less than 20 MP's in the House when I was watching. I don't call this democracy
Hunting exists in the UK purely because the farmers allow the hunt across their land. They do this not only because they see hunting as a pest control but also because the hunt provides important services, like fallen livestock removal for the community. It is unfortunately that some of the high profile hunts attract all the media attention but try telling the hunts in the Welsh hills or the Fells in the Lake District or many other similar areas, that they are the upper classes. They are working people doing a job in often very difficult conditions. Often being called in by a farmer who has a problem with foxes.
Let's use the very small amount of time Parliament actually works for to address the important issues!
I haven't yet heard a convincing argument from the anti-hunt lobby that persuades me that foxhunting is wrong. There's nothing wrong in deriving 'pleasure' from hunting with dogs - no more than the 'pleasure' derived from boxing, or fishing, or even Rugby Football: all are pursuits that have significant 'uncivilised' elements.
Moreover, if foxes are going to have to be hunted anyway, why on earth not make it fun? I'm sure the fox doesn't know the difference.
By their own (confused) logic, the anti-hunt lobby must also disapprove of native Americans who 'enjoy' their brand of hunting, which is just as functional as ours.
Mike Griffiths, Wales
One has to question the depravity of a mind that takes pleasure in the horrific and barbaric killing of an animal. Enough said.
Ban it. We banned slavery, child labour and bear baiting. All of those were socially acceptable for centuries, part of the social fabric and economically justifiable. However, all of them are clearly morally offensive.
A total ban is the only way to go. Chasing foxes for miles, to then rip them apart by a pack of dogs when they're too tired to run any further is disgusting and barbaric. Fox hunting is not a sport, in sport either team could win, not so for the fox. Yes I do admit they're a problem to farmers and are considered to be vermin by some, but come on - this is the 21st century!! We're supposed to be a nation of animal lovers, let's act like we are and ban hunting. There are far more efficient and humane ways to keep the fox population under control. Personally, if it's not banned, I hope all hunters come back in their next life as a fox...
As a lifelong vegetarian I think we should ban the killing of ANY animal no matter how it is done. What gives YOU the right to determine an animal must die for your pleasure - either as an immoral 'hobby' or for eating? The destruction of our water with animal waste, the near annihilation of fish species and the exploitation has to stop.
We don't live in the dark ages any more. The world could produce enough food for everyone to have their fill if we stopped breeding animals as one of the most inefficient food production methods there is. It takes acres of land and years of production to send one beef to market, yet the same acreage and effort can feed a large number of people far longer, far better and more nutritiously.
As to why anyone in their right mind would want to chase a fox, which is inedible anyway, with a pack of almost wild dogs is beyond the comprehension of any sane person.
Derek Ferguson, UK
This fox hunting debate is succeeding in taking the heat away from Stephen Byers
Jon Booth needs education it what democracy is. It's not declaring a government illegal because the voters couldn't be bothered to go and vote. Not going to vote means accepting whoever wins!
A curious time to have a vote on whether or not to keep pest control. Especially when there is real work to be done like getting the national transport system sorted or cracking down on crime.
I'm sure there must be a reason behind this little distraction.
These people are only law abiding until the law gets changed. Hunting is cruel. That is quite obvious to the simplest mind.
Gillian Beckett, Norfolk England
To those who think it's a waste of Parliamentary time. Since 1997, Parliament has voted 4 times to ban hunting. On all previous occasions, the government has been too frightened (why, I don't know) to push it through. So taking 4 attempts to get something that parliament and the people overwhelming want to law - now that's what I call a waste of time. Let's ban and get it over with!
Seems like the first step in a route to a different society in the UK, which a minority want us to live in. Fox hunting is an easy start for a so-called group of animal lovers. Banning foxhunting today, what's tomorrows gripe? If they succeed with this I doubt whether they'd be satisfied. Next step? My guess is National Hunt Racing, so enjoy the Grand National in a couple of weeks as once fox hunting's out of the way then that'll be next on the list. This is, as has always been said, not just about fox hunting but a way of life which a very small section of society want to change.
Mr Elliott, England
The House of Lords have proved that they are obsolete and do not represent the people. Probably too many of them are upper class twits.
This is a complete waste of time and money when the government has far more important issues to discuss. Lots of people will lose their jobs if the ban is enforced resulting in further weakening of the economy.
Andy D, UK
I suspect that Tony Banks had best enjoy his chosen sport, coarse fishing, while he can because it's almost certain that anglers are a future target of the animal rights lobby.
Foxhunting is cruel - there's no two ways about that. But no-one has ever answered the question for me as to why they can't do drag hunting instead. Take the scent from an animal and the dogs and horses follow that. Nothing gets killed and the dogs and horses have a great day out.
Chris, Texas USA
I despair. Animals kill other animals, it is a fact of nature. If some people get kicks out of following a pack of hounds around the Country whilst they hunt for prey, well fine. After all plenty of people go on Safari in Africa to watch lions who kill cute antelope, so what's the difference? What message does this send the poverty stricken of the World; the people of Afghanistan; the people of the Middle East? Truly, the anti-hunt lobby wish to fiddle whilst the World burns.
It is time to end this brutal sadistic and uncivilised practice once and for all. Licensing will never be accepted by the opponents of this barbarity and a total hunt ban now is the will of the people and parliament. The government must realise this and act.
The pro-hunt lobby haven't got a leg to stand on. Hunting with dogs is immoral because people are pursuing an animal to its death for pleasure.
They are not doing it for any notions of conservation! If we are to consider ourselves to be civilised then culling or pest control (whenever it arises) must be carried out in the most efficient manner and for that alone!
I have no time for all those hypocrites who try to disguise their lust for blood as being an act of legitimate pursuit!!
I have lived in the country most of my life, and have seen first hand the horrific cruelty of the fox hunt. These people who foxhunt will not consider drag hunting because there's nothing to kill. Why can it not be banned if the people want it, the House of Commons want it - what right have the House of Lords to hold up the will of the Commons and the people?
A ban on fox hunting will not only have a serious economic effect upon many rural communities, such as my own in the Lake District, it will also not solve concerns about animal cruelty. The hounds used in hunting cannot be easily rehoused, so most will be put down. Furthermore, farmers will still need to control the fox population, the only option open to them is to resort to shooting, which does not discriminate between the age and health of a fox, as hunting with hounds does. Furthermore, shooting can cause as much suffering as hunting. A ban on fox hunting will also destroy a very important part of the cultural heritage and way of life of many people in rural areas. Fox hunting is not just the pursuit of the upper classes as is often assumed. A potential ban on fox hunting is the last thing rural Britain needs at this time, as we count the financial consequences of foot and mouth disease.
One anachronism votes to retain another. It just highlights the fact that we need to get rid of both of them!
18,000 foxes killed on the roads, 800 odd killed by hunts, mostly in sheep country. Ban cars? Why not.
Fox hunting is the killing of an animal for pleasure, and it always has been. The people of this country want it to stop, and stop it had better.
The minority who live away from towns and who like to call themselves "country folk" should understand what the even tinier minority could end up doing.
It is quite likely that there will be some sort of fudge, but the "victory" is likely to be pyhrric. Don't pick a fight with the vastly more numerous urban population on whom you rely for so much. Fox hunting just isn't worth it.
The present government was only voted for by 25% of the total electorate. Only 50% of the electorate bothered to vote in the last election. Please stop invoking democracy in this argument. The Commons is NOT a democratically elected body in its present form.
Sheralyn Byrom , UK
Can't people see that this is only a first step in abolishing this sport? Instead of banning it outright, they regulate it and license it to death. If you believe this noble sport, stand up and say so!
How many of those MPs who voted for a total ban on hunting will be prepared to destroy the 20,000 odd hounds/terriers/beagles/lurchers/minkhounds many with hundreds of years of history behind them, which will be made redundant by a ban? Draghunting is not an option for dogs that have hunted live quarry. Who of those who voted for a ban will be man enough to face this mass destruction in return for the life of not a single fox?
Ralph Maddams, United Kingdom
In years to come, our ancestors will look back at the time we hunted with hounds with the same incredulity that we look back at bear and bull baiting. There will always be a minority who regard blood letting, in all its forms, as "sport" and of course they need dissuading of their aberrant view; that what mature democracy is all about.
Halal and Kosher butchery practices are unnecessarily cruel and are practised by a small minority of the population. Surely they should be banned too.
Banning hunting with dogs is the thin end of an insidious wedge. Which minority will be next to get the bad news that their age old tradition is now deemed to be out of step with modern society?
All the people from the US, Ireland and Scotland leave English issues alone. The English should decide and all foreign MPs should not have been allowed to vote upon the issue. Fox hunting is less painful than being shot and dying in a bush of starvation up to three days later. Also it is a country issue that people in the cities do not understand, I think it is a case of watching the Fox and the Hound to many times. We hunt rabbits with ferrets, we catch fish with hook and we kill animals with a bolt to the head to eat. Humane ways of killing are a contradiction, thus a ban is to.
In a country that is inhumane to its own citizens (Diane Pretty) how can we expect any feelings for animal suffering?
Barry Hake, Netherlands
Supposing we never knew that foxhunting existed, and we were asked in turn suggestions for controlling an animal in a humane way. Would we really suggest chasing said animal across the countryside, petrified out of its' wits, and then having it brutally ripped apart? I don't think so. It's a great shame to see these out-of-touch Lords in powerful positions because of their money and landed status, making decisions that affect the lives of those they have no concept about. It's clearly dangerous ground.
I am 14. This, however, doesn't make me stupid. In English at school, we were asked to write a speech about something we feel strongly about, so I am doing fox hunting.
The way I see it, all these people are trying to get fox hunting banned because of the poor foxes. What about all my poor chickens, or my poor ducks, or my poor CAT! Don't they count for anything? And what about all the poor dogs that will have to be put down because they can't be rehomed? Is the suffering of all these animals really worth it? I mean, lets ban cars! They probably do just as much damage to the fox population!
Besides, the hunts do a lot more than actually hunt.
I hope you will read this, and take some of my arguments into consideration before jumping to conclusions about something you evidently don't fully understand.
Matt Hayward, Bath, England
No doubt the same Lords who voted against a ban will be out with the Wellington boots and green coat brigade on the next Sunday club foxhunt. I'm from the country and I can tell you this so called "sport" is just a rich mans game, its got nothing to do with countryside ways of life.
The vast majority of people in this country want an end to fox hunting. They are not loud, organized or vocal. They look on, quietly and expect their government to do as they have promised. If the government fails to act, these people will quietly take their vote elsewhere
Neil JG Partridge, USA
The Anti-Hunting fiasco is prompted originally and primarily by class hatred. It is a stupid waste of Government time.
No compromise. Ban hunting outright. As for your "saboteur turned hunter", I suspect she is merely an adrenaline junkie, and would benefit from addiction treatment. When hunting, coursing etc. are abolished, the anti-cruelty lobby can turn, if they wish, to battery farming, but - one bite at a time, as the mouse ate the cheese!
No creature should ever be killed for sport; neither foxes nor fish. The culling of foxes can surely be done much more efficiently than with a pack of horses and hounds. Killing for food is another matter. If people want to catch fish or even rabbits to eat then that surely is within their civil rights, but killing for sport is just sick. The people who do this are worse than most animals.
Andrew Law, UK
If this so-called sport is not banned after such an overwhelming vote by the elected house, will we be allowed to pick and chose which other votes that we wish to take notice of?
Personally I think that hunting of foxes should be banned totally. It is just an excuse for a bunch of people with nothing better to do than running around the countryside tooting on their horns chasing foxes. If foxes are such a nuisance, shoot them out right, a much more humane way than chasing them to death.
If the people want something to do then a Playstation 2 is cheaper and much more humane than a blood sport.
Absolutely disgraceful! This is not the first time that anti-democratic Tory weighted House of Lords have scuppered a perfectly reasonable and popular bill. When are the British electorate going to wake up to the stupidity of our present constitution!
Neil Pearce, London, England
Martin, do you really consider foxes to be criminals? When do you think they last drove while under the influence or mugged an old lady? And to Christian: I resent you saying that because I'm Irish I should have no say in this debate, I still have to abide by British rules and hold a British passport. I want to be able to vote on this issue and let my views as a British citizen be registered but as usual if a referendum is held those of us in Northern Ireland will not be able to take part.
P.S. I am totally against fox hunting it is disgusting and people who claim that because I'm a townie and therefore don't understand obviously haven't taken the time to explore both sides.
Within the last few days there have been Talking Points on banning fox hunting and on whether the death penalty is legitimate. Are we heading towards a society where you can kill criminals, but foxes can't be touched? Personally, I prefer the status quo, on both counts.
Thank God the MPs have had the guts to put an end to this perversion.
17 Mar 02 | UK Politics
Blunkett backs hunting compromise
16 Mar 02 | UK Politics
Downing Street denies hunting deal
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites
Other Talking Points:
Links to more Talking Point stories
|^^ Back to top
News Front Page | World | UK | UK Politics | Business | Sci/Tech | Health | Education | Entertainment | Talking Point | In Depth | AudioVideo
To BBC Sport>> | To BBC Weather>>
© MMIII | News Sources | Privacy