UNFOUNDED REASONS NOT TO BAN TRAIL HUNTING
Hunts use Social Media to promote their cause. They are in a blind panic about the forthcoming trail hunting ban, and are coming up with reasons why it shouldn’t happen. Their arguments are so very weak though, and are easy to refute. Please use the link to this page, every time you see one of their posts, or comments.
unfounded reasons not to ban trail hunting
||| UNFOUNDED REASONS NOT TO BAN TRAIL HUNTING NO.1 ||
“It’s a way of life for rural communities”. It is true that hunting IS a ‘way of life’ for the hunters, but NOT for the rest of us. Only 7% of rural people support hunting, around 7% are undecided and everyone else opposes it. (Source below).
Many of us would prefer it if we could take our dogs on country walks without the risk of running into the hunt. Many of us would prefer it if we didn’t have to shut our gates and get our animals in when the hunt comes through. Our world would be so much better WITHOUT the hunt.
Thomas Hardy (English novelist and poet, 1840 – 1928) objected to hunting of all kinds. He was born in Dorset and lived there throughout his life.
||| UNFOUNDED REASONS NOT TO BAN TRAIL HUNTING NO.2 |||
“Trail hunting creates jobs”. It is never right to create jobs solely to support illegal or cruel activities. Police, for example, exist to prevent and prosecute crime. If drug abuse ended, no one would be clamouring to bring it back because we could employ more police.
When hunting is finished, AAF will no longer be needed, so, like the hunts, we’ll be out of a job (though ours is voluntary
– and we’ll easily find another).
Additionally, most of the jobs associated with the hunt (eg farrier) will still be needed anyway.
||| UNFOUNDED REASONS NOT TO BAN TRAIL HUNTING, NO. 3 |||
“Trail hunting is a legal activity” – just how many times do we need to go round this particular buoy, I wonder? The hunts have taken so many bites of the cherry, they’ve run out of cherries (and I’ve run out of appropriate metaphors, unless anyone can think of some more). The evidence is overwhelming. Foxes are being chased and killed by hunts. Police know that, the Government knows that, we know that.
Trail hunting might be legal, but the hunts aren’t actually doing it, are they?
||| UNFOUNDED REASONS NOT TO BAN TRAIL HUNTING NO. 4|||
“Before the 2004 hunting ban, Parliament wasted 700 hours debating it.” Yes, it’s astonishing that so much time was spent discussing why a such a cruel sport needed to be banned. However, those 700 hours can’t be retrieved. They’re gone. And, it doesn’t mean that another 700 hours is will be wasted this time. The 700 hours was mostly taken up with pro hunters trying to justify why they thought it was ok to take a pack of hounds into the countryside and tear a living creature to pieces for fun. There are far, far fewer pro hunters in Parliament now. The hard-core hunting MPs (eg Simon Hart and Bill Wiggin) have gone. The appetite to finish fox hunting for good is there, with the vast majority (from ALL parties, including Conservatives) opposing it.
The photo below is of the moment when Otis Ferry and his pro-hunting friends stormed Parliament in 2004. They were comvicted of Public Order offences.
||| UNFOUNDED REASONS NOT TO BAN TRAIL HUNTIING NO.5 |||
“Only 1% of hunts have been convicted”. I’m always astonished the pros think this is a point in their favour. We all know that the low conviction rate is due to the weakness of the Hunting Act and the monumental difficulty of collecting the evidence. It’s not because the hunts aren’t breaking the law. When a hunt ends up in court, they send a senior barrister to defend them, something only the rich can afford. Only a couple of weeks ago, trail hunting was used as a defence for the (defunct) Oakley Hunt trial, and once again, the killers got away with it. The same defence has been used in multiple cases where a wild animal has been chased and killed by a hunt.
The Hunting Act isn’t working and for the last 20 years, the hunts have taken full advantage of it.
Need facts and evidence? Look no further than our report, Broken Law, how the Hunting Act has Failed.
||| UNFOUNDED REASONS NOT TO BAN TRAIL HUNTING NO.6 |||
“Trail hunting is humane.” Clean boot hunting and drag hunting are both humane, but trail hunting is not. Even if the hunt really is laying an artificial trail for the hounds to follow, trail hunting inevitably involves live foxes. The trail is made of fox scent and they lay it where foxes live. Obviously, the hounds pick up the scent of a live fox. Unlike clean boot and drag hunting, the huntsman doesn’t know where the trail is laid, so they don’t know when the hounds are tracking a real fox, or the artificial trail. This means that when the hounds deviate from the artificial trail, the huntsman doesn’t know. This is all very convenient for the hunt because they want to chase live quarry.
Many hunts have admitted to having ‘accidents’.
Wild animals are put at risk every time the ‘trail hunts’ take a pack of hounds into the countryside.
Trail hunting is not humane.
||| UNFOUNDED REASONS NOT TO BAN TRAIL HUNTING NO.7 |||
“It’s class war. You only want to ban it because you’re jealous.”
The inconsistency of this ‘argument’ undermines it completely. Hunts are at pains to let us know that people from ALL walks of life go hunting. It’s also true to say that people from ALL walks of life object to it. Not a class war then.
And what are we jealous of? Let’s be sensible and start by assuming that the majority of people objecting to hunting have a roof over their heads, food on the table and an income. I’m sure some hunters have more than some ‘antis’, but I’m also sure that some ‘antis’ have more than some hunters. It’s nonsense to suggest anything else. By and large, though, it’ll be fairly even.
What’s left? Ahh, yes. Their privileged position in society. Their unfair access to influence and corruption. Even two years ago, that was a Big Thing. Not so much now that we’ve had a change of government. Their influence is still there, but on the wane.
Speaking personally, I would never be happy to “wrongly win”. I’m not jealous of corruption.
And – who would want to be addicted to an illegal and cruel sport? No one likes animal cruelty. And no one likes a hunter (except another hunter).
||| UNFOUNDED REASONS NOT TO BAN TRAIL HUNTING NO.8 |||
Every year, hunts kill around 1/3 of their 6-8 year-old hounds, replacing them with pups they have bred themselves. Despite the promise of a trail hunting ban, hunts are STILL breeding hounds. None of these pups has a certain future.
In 3 years, all the hounds alive now would be killed by the hunts anyway, and there would be none to replace them, if breeding stopped now.
Many hounds’ working lives are miserable and dangerous, as well as short. Our latest report “The Lives and Deaths of Dogs Used in Hunting (2)” graphically reveals the suffering of hounds over this last season.
Poor dogs. They’re just dogs. They don’t deserve this treatment.
And the root cause?
The hunts continued, irresponsible breeding of hounds. They must stop now, and resolve the situation themselves humanely.
