Just found this on facebook

[The Large One]

I joined the military and went to Iraq. No seriously, I have no lust for blood and i'm an animal lover.

Not all animals, it seems.

 

[junior]

no interest in blood and love animals, so you watch a fox get pulled apart by dogs thats like saying Im a strict vegetarian but love a good bloody steak

I've never seen a fox pulled apart by hounds. It doesn't happen. It's illegal.

 

[Surrey_Albion]

I've never seen a fox pulled apart by hounds. It doesn't happen. It's illegal.

But you agree with it?? it amazes me you critise other for not having "facts" then show a bit of cocckyness with things like "next" and "un-educated people" yet you pick and choose what you answer and still cannot answer the basic question "why do have a need to see a fox torn apart by dogs" it seems to me you try and be far cleverer than you actually are and I am starting to wonder if you are just a WUM

 

[junior]

But you agree with it?? it amazes me you critise other for not having "facts" then show a bit of cocckyness with things like "next" and "un-educated people" yet you pick and choose what you answer and still cannot answer the basic question "why do have a need to see a fox torn apart by dogs" it seems to me you try and be far cleverer than you actually are and I am starting to wonder if you are just a WUM

Did you mean 'why do YOU have a need to see a fox torn apart by hounds?" If so, i've answered it a few posts ago.

Whats a WUM?

 

[hans kraay fan club]

The remaining hounds tear the dead fox to pieces.

I've never seen a fox pulled apart by hounds. It doesn't happen. It's illegal.

Pardon?

 

[junior]

Pardon?

PRE-ban and POST-ban

 

[hans kraay fan club]

The remaining hounds tear the dead fox to pieces.

I've never seen a fox pulled apart by hounds. It doesn't happen. It's illegal.

PRE-ban and POST-ban

Pardon?

 

[Surrey_Albion]

Did you mean 'why do YOU have a need to see a fox torn apart by hounds?" If so, i've answered it a few posts ago.

Whats a WUM?

Im not sure what is going on now you are pro fox hunting yes? so why do you feel it is acceptable and the need to see an animal killed by other animals? I WUM is a Wind Up Merchant

 

[hans kraay fan club]

my cousin is somewhat of a shooter and him and his crew will frequently kill 60 plus foxes in a nights shooting

A few men with guns, in one night cull 60 foxes.

We paid a few people to get rid of foxes from our (my in-laws) farm. Those boys certainly got rid of a lot of a lot of foxes and rabbits in a couple of days.

A few men with gun in two days, cull 'a lot' of foxes.

Well our keeper is doing pretty well, 67 so far this year,

One man with a rifle, over an eight month period, culls 67 foxes.

I can't speak for every hunt, but personally I have been on days when there is no sniff of a fox and I have also been on a day when i believe about 7 were dispatched with. Seven would be classed as a very very good day, although i'm sure there have been days with more.

About 60 people, 30 horses and 60 dogs, cull one or two in a day, maybe up to half a dozen on a 'very, very good day'.

Junior, can you please clarify your definition of 'efficient' for us?

 

[fork me]

Rubbish!

Hunting by hounds is the most natural and humane way of controlling the population of all four quarry species in the countryside - fox, deer, hare and mink.

Don't be silly.

That statement is supported by over 500 members of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons.

Hmmm, every single practising vet in the country, and a some that aren't are members of the RCVS, of those, only 500 support your statement? That's a tiny number. How many vets do you think there are in the UK?

 

[fork me]

Death is almost instantaneous for the fox when killed by hounds (this does not happen anymore!).

Instaneous AFTER running in fear of it's life for a whle first, something that is NOT natural for foxes (as top predators) to do.

People hunt foxes because they enjoy it, NOT because they genuinely believe it to be the kindest way of killing foxes. It's a red herring and a ludicrously unbelievable one.

 

[fork me]

everything I have to say on this subject is backed up by fact, documented fact.

So ypu keep saying, but I have yet to see you provide any evidence of that.

 

[fork me]

Again, i refer you back to my post where it is FACTUALLY documented that hunting foxes with hounds IS the most humane was of controlling their numbers and death is almost instantanious.

Let's get this straight, you DON'T consider a broasdsheet newpaper to be sufficient evidence of something you don't agree with (for the record, nor do I), however, you expect us to believe that something is documented fact purely on the basis of your post?

Get a grip.

 

[fork me]

My apologies for this being 'cut & paste', however it is worded better than I ever could. It give you the answer to your question and dispels the argument that the 'chase' is the cruel part.


A large number of scientists who study animal behaviour believe that foxes are fully in control of their wits. Furthermore, observation by countrypeople over hundreds of years shows that:- (a) They appear not to anticipate their possible death. (b) They seem not to be tortured by being chased. A large body of authoritative opinion has good reason to assume that their genes, together with inherited and acquired learning, have adapted them to the chase. However, the "Cruelty Argument" will remain sterile because it is subjective, either way, until it becomes possible for a human being to know objectively what a fox is thinking.

Two British zoologists at the University of Nottingham, (Chris Barnard, professor of animal behaviour and Jane Hurst, a behavioural ecologist) back up observations that foxes seem not to anticipate death and appear not to be suffering while being chased. Their views can be summarised as:-
(a) animals who are hunted regularly (e.g. foxes) may well be conditioned to regard the stress of being hunted as normal ;
(b) do not confuse stress with suffering.
Stress is a physical condition. Suffering is a mental condition. The former does not inevitably cause the latter. A marathon runner is highly stressed but is not suffering unless his stress exceeds anything that he has experienced previously and has not, therefore, mentally adapted himself to cope with. Stress produces adrenalin and endorphins which produce exhilaration to mask some of the stress. Judgements in respect of animals about the balance between pain and exhilaration (both caused by a stress) are very difficult and human analogies are unlikely to be reliable. The fact that foxes are fully in control of their wits when being hunted is shown by the following examples:- they know how much scent they leave, how to mask it by running through ground fouled by cattle etc. or water and how to use the wind. Also other tactics too numerous to discuss here. They use these tactics methodically while being chased. Foxes have been seen to kill and eat a small mammal while being hunted.


I hope that answers your question and should put an end to that side of the argument.

Which scientific journal is this taken from? You accuse others of being "uneducated", but if you were as educated as you claim, you'd know that a small section from a published article with no references is meaningless, and proves nothing.

 

[fork me]

No not at all. Quite a few get away and against popular belief, are not dug up.

That's strange, or at least it WOULD be strange if the real purpose of hunts was to control fox levels rather that just have a rather jolly time.

 

[fork me]

The first or second hound to reach the fox catches it, usually by a hind leg. The next hound instinctively bites its neck and gives a quick twist which breaks the spinal cord. From the moment the first hound reaches the fox to its death is very seldom more than a very few seconds. The remaining hounds tear the dead fox to pieces.

So we've now already gone up from "instantaneous" to "a few seconds".

 

[fork me]

Research entitled "Welfare Aspects of Shooting Foxes", presented to Parliament in June 2003 by several scientists

WHich scientists? Where can I read a copy?

 

[fork me]

The veterinary profession is made up of around 24,000 registered veterinary surgeons.

http://www.rcvs.org.uk/about-us/about-the-veterinary-profession/

Hmmm, 500/24000 x 100, that would be just over 2%.

 

[fork me]

I am at work and have limited access to the internet. NSC is one of only a few site's I can get onto. If you type into YouTube "fox being killed by hounds" there Is a video in which you will see that the fox is dead within seconds. No more evidence than that needed.

So someone who thinks that the people they are arguing against are "uneducated" thinks that one video showing one example of a fox being killed is proof that they are all killed that easily.

Which clown and/or barber college did you get your degree from?

 

[fork me]

Who said how many the question was posed to? It also does not mean that the other 23,500 disagreed.

Correct, but without knowing how many it was posed to the statistic is completely meaningless, all we know for certain is that the percentage of vets that, when asked, agreed with the statement is somewhere between 2% and 100%.

Not really very convincing I'm afraid.