Foxes

[Anfield]

I recon the lack of response means "none of your business". The OP asked if someone could help not justify himself/herself. Do you have a solution that doesn't involved shooting foxes and doesn't involve erecting fencing that isn't subsidised by the government?

Pegasus asked a perfectly legitimate question.
If OP can/will not advise what type of livestock are being bothered by "pests", how can anyone offer an alternative solution to him?

Why on earth should any landowner and stock owner have to come on here and justify why they wish to rid their land of vermin.

He was not asked to come on here, OP made post of his own free will and therefore should expect that some people would not agree with his request for help in "shooting these b----y things"

Get a grip of yourselves people, it's all fine to sit in your town house and got to your cosy town job each day, it's a totally different story when you work 24 hours a day to lamb and look after your animals in all weather conditions and have foxes on the prowl that are liable to destroy your hard efforts.

How very judgemental of you to assume that because people do not share your belief in killing foxes that we are all "Townies", I most certainly am not

I do not believe in killing animals for no reason but I do believe that when they pose a risk they should be dealt with in an efficient and quick way

See my post above for "Official" figures from an independent organisation (DEFRA)

I abhor fox hunting but I can totally understand why someone would want to protect their land by humanely killing and we have absolutely no right whatsoever to try to butt in and interfere in their choice.[/quote]

So you are an expert are you, I actually know many people who have had rabbit hutches broken into and rabbits killed in hutches in their gardens,

Same old argument, People who support the killing of foxes always "know someone" who have had poultry, rabbits etc killed by foxes.
Simple answer is, like LEANNE states is to build an enclosure which foxes can not get into!!

[onecalledk]

So you are an expert are you, I actually know many people who have had rabbit hutches broken into and rabbits killed in hutches in their gardens, so how on earth is someone in the country supposed to keep the things away in fields if they want to have a go at their livestock. Go out and give it a try.
And the OP is trying to keep their stock safe by removing the danger they are facing. So your argument there is totally silly.
You see there is also a townie statement, Farmers genuinely need their 4x4 townies dont.

Foxes are animals, we all agree, livestock are animals, we all agree, so why is it when it comes down to asking the question of how to deal with these animals it becomes a townie /country debate??????

wild animals have lived in the countryside since the dawn of time. MAN has invaded their territory not the other way around. It seems from reading these posts that farmers would be very happy if they could raise livestock and not have any predators attack said livestock. They would upset the balance of nature and cause a huge knock on effect. You cannot eradicate a species and not have consequences. Surely if you live in the country you accept the country for what it is.

Turning into a debate of who lives in the country or a town is not helpful and is a bit childish is it not ....

I live in the country so I know more about it that you sort of mentally helps NO ONE ....

K

[pegasus]

Isn't this what everyone else would call a job? Why should farmers be any different - they have as much right to put food on the table, pay the bills and buy nice things as anyone else.

Unicorn is right - your post shouts 'townie'.

I've just been driving my 4x4 - out spraying my fields to kill the docks

good for you but maybe you should spend more time stating where you get youre photos from and not trying to say that the same photos are portraying the exact opposite of what they are really showing?

youre posts shout fraud

[Leanne]

good for you but maybe you should spend more time stating where you get youre photos from and not trying to say that the same photos are portraying the exact opposite of what they are really showing?

youre posts shout fraud

And what do yours shout. They look to me like someone who doesn't have the vocabulary to voice a well constructed argument so results to name calling. Try again

Anyway fraudulent about what? Anyone can see where the photo's are from - I linked to them. Just click quote and the source will come up...

All I stated was this. I didn't state anything was being eaten - I actually said there was no blood and gore...How is it showing the exact opposite? The fox is chasing the lamb - the fact it escaped is irrelevant. Antis will tell you hunting with hounds is inefficient as some foxes escape - they don't show those pictures though they show the blood and gore.

They love playing with lambs

No blood or gore in the pic don't worry but shut your eyes if you're easily offended....

[porshiepoo]

At the end of the day Fox kill livestock, chicken etc as a means of survival and to feed their young.
The same cannot be said for hunting with hounds. It's a cruel barbaric sport.

Leanne it is entirely up to you whether you agree with Fox hunting or not, however, I would suggest that you do some real research before claiming that hunting with a pack of dogs is "quicker".
How long do you think a hunt goes on for? 10 mins? 20 mins?? In extremely fortunate circumstances for the poor fox it may do (not exactly "quick" though is it).
Hunts can go on for hours. Hours of chasing down and wearing out a poor Fox that could have possibly been bred for that particular event.
The kill is neither "quick" nor swift. It's barbaric and it's brutal and extremely noisy.

There are many circumstances where Fox may need to be culled, I am not disputing that but their are quicker and kinder methods than hunting them down and protecting a species purely to satiate the blood lust of idiots on horseback is certainly not the way we should be doing things - IMO.

[pegasus]

- the fact it escaped is irrelevant. .

not irrelelvant at all. very relelvant.

there is scientific evidence to suggest that foxes only take dead lambs. i saw that on tele years ago. farmers dont like this research i know but it was scientioficially accurate

[porshiepoo]

Are you willing to pay the extra that it costs for the produce?

I have 'foxproofed' my chicken run but housing them in a slate built building and surrounding the enclosure with electrified chicken fencing. The fencing alone for a 50m x 20m run cost me £350 to put up (and that is using my OH's labour). Imagine multiplying this up to acres???

I too have chickens and yep, the local Fox has taken its fair share.
Do I want to set my dogs on that Fox because I'm down a few eggs? Nope!

The way I see it is if I want to make sure my Chicken are 100% safe and secure I build an enclosure similar to the one you have and I don't moan about the expense.
However I want my chicken to roam free so I have to accept that I am going to lose some to the local Fox who has a litter to feed no doubt.
Sad for the Chicken but hey ho, that's nature for you.

I would say the same for Livestock. There are ways to keep them safe however a risk is taken every single day by every single farmer. I would imagine that many farmers are resigned to the odd loss of life?

How many more species are we to lose simply because they have gotten in the way of mankinds dominance on this earth?

[Leanne]

Leanne it is entirely up to you whether you agree with Fox hunting or not, however, I would suggest that you do some real research before claiming that hunting with a pack of dogs is "quicker".
How long do you think a hunt goes on for? 10 mins? 20 mins?? In extremely fortunate circumstances for the poor fox it may do (not exactly "quick" though is it).

As stated before - I was anti. Now I'm looking for sustainable alternatives. I have done some real research - I have been to a hunt and seen what happens with my own eyes. This is not what turned me anti though - I didn't get the impression that people there were there for the bloodlust, far from it. Most seemed to be there to exercise their horses. And contrary to popular belief there are just as many foot followers as mounted people. The hunt I witnessed lasted 3 hours. There was much waiting around, many false starts and to be honest it wasn't at all what I expected. When a hound was found the actual 'chase' lasted about 15 minutes. The fox managed to stop for a pee along the way and was caught by the lead hound and dispatched by having its throat torn out (this is what I didn't like). It was however quick.

On the other side I have seen a fox shot by a farmer but not killed, just mortally wounded. It got away but who knows how long it lasted for before it finally died. Shooting isn't always the quick and painless option...

I am well researched - more than most I have debated with (it you want some really interesting debate go on the horse and hound forum where there are just as many antis as pros but where people are talking with a sound knowledge base). Any points I make on this subject are from personal experience, not second hand or what I read on a website.

[Leanne]

i saw that on tele years ago.

Oh so it must be true Did it tell you with a moving mouth like in the film Babe?

Conversley I have seen research that shows that it is the sick and injured foxes that take farm stock. Foxes that are in too poor condition to hunt.

It is actually fairly rare for lambs to spontaneously die in the field. Usually they are housed until they are strong enough to go out and stand a fighting chance.

However I want my chicken to roam free so I have to accept that I am going to lose some to the local Fox who has a litter to feed no doubt.
Sad for the Chicken but hey ho, that's nature for you.

But it isn't nature is it? Chickens are not wild animals - they were bred by humans to be the meat/egg producers that they are. Why does a foxes life matter more than a chickens? That is something I am yet to work out. Without your chickens the foxes would not starve - they would eat rabbits. All free range chucks do it make it easier for the fox.

[Anfield]

As stated before - I was anti. Now I'm looking for sustainable alternatives. I have done some real research - I have been to a hunt and seen what happens with my own eyes. This is not what turned me anti though - I didn't get the impression that people there were there for the bloodlust, far from it. Most seemed to be there to exercise their horses. And contrary to popular belief there are just as many foot followers as mounted people. The hunt I witnessed lasted 3 hours. There was much waiting around, many false starts and to be honest it wasn't at all what I expected. When a hound was found the actual 'chase' lasted about 15 minutes. The fox managed to stop for a pee along the way and was caught by the lead hound and dispatched by having its throat torn out (this is what I didn't like). It was however quick.

On the other side I have seen a fox shot by a farmer but not killed, just mortally wounded. It got away but who knows how long it lasted for before it finally died. Shooting isn't always the quick and painless option...

I am well researched - more than most I have debated with (it you want some really interesting debate go on the horse and hound forum where there are just as many antis as pros but where people are talking with a sound knowledge base). Any points I make on this subject are from personal experience, not second hand or what I read on a website.

So your "well researched Research" was based on ONE fox hunt that you attended. Even the "The Scum" newspaper does better research on its stories than that.
Would you like to share with us what hunt it was you went to?

If people want to exercise their horse why does it have to involve chasing animals

[Leanne]

So your "well researched Research" was based on ONE fox hunt that you attended. Even the "The Scum" newspaper does better research on its stories than that.
Would you like to share with us what hunt it was you went to?

If people want to exercise their horse why does it have to involve chasing animals

Not sure I see the relevance but - it was the East Cheshire Hunt.

That one hunt made me decide hunting wasn't for me. I didn't have the stomach for it. Why would I want to put myself through that twice to offer myself more proof? Just so an anonymous interwebber is satisfied? I think not...

You cannot exercise your horse in the same way by any other method. In England there isn't the right to roam, in Scotland there isn't the right to roam freely lol (many areas are inaccessible to horses). Bridle paths allow speeds no greater than a trot so that pretty limits where you can do anaerobic fittening work for a horse. That is why people hunt.

Historically drag hunts were not allowed access through fields - farmers weren't keen if they were getting nothing out of it. Since the banning of hunting with hounds hunts have increased but there is none of the old 'rough riding' that used to be associated with the old hunts (maybe this is a good thing).

And why do we enjoy riding with the hunt? There is nothing more liberating than galloping your horse, we borrow freedom from them.

[pegasus]

Oh so it must be true Did it tell you with a moving mouth like in the film Babe?.

no babe.

you aint much of a scientist if you didnt even detreimne what the research youre mocking was or when and where it was conducted. pull the other one babe

[pegasus]

And why do we enjoy riding with the hunt? .

'did'. its banned now and a good job to.

[Leanne]

no babe.

you aint much of a scientist if you didnt even detreimne what the research youre mocking was or when and where it was conducted. pull the other one babe

I wasn't calling you babe I was referring to the film with the pig in hence the capitalisation. I didn't actually understand much of that post though...

Research? Since when is 'the tele' research?

'did'. its banned now and a good job to.

Ah but we can still go for a 'hunt' with hounds across the countryside and lovely it is too THAT is what I was referring to. In case you missed my earlier posts I am anti hunting with hounds. Why the animosity?

Has anyone thought of an alternative yet to hunting with hounds, shooting, trapping and poisoning? Or are we just going to go over this old topic again which is helping noone...

[pegasus]

And what do yours shout. They look to me like someone who doesn't have the vocabulary to voice a well constructed argument so results to name calling. Try again .

perhaps they are due to dyslexia

[porshiepoo]

As stated before - I was anti. Now I'm looking for sustainable alternatives. I have done some real research - I have been to a hunt and seen what happens with my own eyes. This is not what turned me anti though - I didn't get the impression that people there were there for the bloodlust, far from it. Most seemed to be there to exercise their horses. And contrary to popular belief there are just as many foot followers as mounted people. The hunt I witnessed lasted 3 hours. There was much waiting around, many false starts and to be honest it wasn't at all what I expected. When a hound was found the actual 'chase' lasted about 15 minutes. The fox managed to stop for a pee along the way and was caught by the lead hound and dispatched by having its throat torn out (this is what I didn't like). It was however quick.

On the other side I have seen a fox shot by a farmer but not killed, just mortally wounded. It got away but who knows how long it lasted for before it finally died. Shooting isn't always the quick and painless option...

I am well researched - more than most I have debated with (it you want some really interesting debate go on the horse and hound forum where there are just as many antis as pros but where people are talking with a sound knowledge base). Any points I make on this subject are from personal experience, not second hand or what I read on a website.

Rubbish!
You claim to have been to "a" hunt which IYO happens to have been "quick" and you have seen "a" fox shot by a farmer.
So you being "well researched" entails 1 hunt and 1 shooting and from those 2 incidents you have come to the conclusion that Hunting with hounds is better than a bullet? Oh and let's not forget about the "forum" research!!!!

No horse owner needs to join a hunt to exercise their horse so do not fool yourself into believing that what you claim to have witnessed must somehow mean that the sport cannot be as bad as it is.
Those people just "exercising" their horses are gutted if the hunt ends in a no kill believe me.
There may be the occasional short hunt (shortest I was on happened to be about 1hour and a half) just as there is the occasional mis-shot from a gun.

What of the Foxes that attempt to jump barbed wire in their escape and get hung up on it? Is that humane? Swift? Quick?
What happens if a Fox goes to ground? Some send Terriers down to flush them out which can and does end in body parts missing from both the Fox and the Terrier. Other times they can be down there for hours until one or the other is killed. Is that humane? swift? Quick?
Of course let's not forget the horses and the dogs. They do not escape this blood thirsty sport unharmed every single time. Horses have had to be destroyed due to injury as have many many dogs.
Is it really bloody worth it????

[Aaldtimer]

It's not just in the countryside that all the problems are!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/england/10251349.stm

[Leanne]

Rubbish!
You claim to have been to "a" hunt which IYO happens to have been "quick" and you have seen "a" fox shot by a farmer.
So you being "well researched" entails 1 hunt and 1 shooting and from those 2 incidents you have come to the conclusion that Hunting with hounds is better than a bullet? Oh and let's not forget about the "forum" research!!!!

Actually I stated that the bullet isn't always the quicker option, not that hounds were always quicker as you seem to think I have said. That was a completely separate issue. The issue with my decision and research into hunting was stated as the reason why I decided to be anti, not with the relative death speed of the fox. It took me one hunt to decide that hunting was not for me. Drag hunting however I love and it is the best way to exercise a horse IMO - It is brilliant fittening work, it encourages them to be bold, it teaches them to handle all types of terrain, it strengthens their tendons in preparation for competiton and what's more the horses enjoy it. Of course there are a few who don't, including my friends boy, who also doesn't much like being turned out in the field.

I'll say it again - there's nothing more liberating than galloping your horse - we borrow freedom. How can that be construed as offensive?

Pegasus - dyslexia isn't really an excuse. Someone can be dyslexic and have difficulty in spelling and recognising words, but still put together a wonderfully eloquent argument. Dyslexia doesn't make someone unable to debate - ignorance and closed-mindedness does.

[Mrs Bucket]

[quote=Boozeburglar;717835]I've seen the damage horse and hound hunts do, not to feed themselves or their offspring but for the sheer pleasure of the kill - they are merciless.

Foxes can be controlled humanely and efficiently, no need to return to the bad old days. Incidentally many of those involved in the traditional hunts are far from being country folk.
[/quote
agree agree agree

[pegasus]

Pegasus - dyslexia isn't really an excuse. Someone can be dyslexic and have difficulty in spelling and recognising words, but still put together a wonderfully eloquent argument. Dyslexia doesn't make someone unable to debate - ignorance and closed-mindedness does.

thanks but i wouldnt rate you as much of a medical expert sorry