ARGUMENTS FOR HUNTING...
Welcome to a section that blows away every argument, hypocritical comment, and blatant manure (using the more polite country term) that the pro-hunt lobby come up with. Additions welcome!
...AND THE TRUTH.
FOXES DO NOT SUFFER ON THE CHASE AND ACTUALLY ENJOY IT!
Even most of the hunters do not claim this anymore after the pro-hunt bias 'Monty' Burns Inquiry found that the welfare of all animals hunted by hounds are compromised. (What a wonderful understatement!) Further evidence of suffering has been collected from examinations of foxes rescued by sabs. Suffering includes: hazardously high heart rates, shock, and kidney failure.
Back to Top
DEATH IS BY A QUICK NIP TO THE BACK OF THE NECK.
Whoever came up with this has never gone hunting (or sabbing!) or alternatively has watched too many episodes of 'Big Cat Diary'. Generally dogs do not have the strength, power or instinct to kill in this way. Foxes, hare, and deer are mauled, mutilated and torn apart while still conscious. For the ultimate kick go watch a hare coursing event which usually ends in the hare being caught in the middle of a tug-of-war between two dogs. When a hare is in pain, its screams sound similar to a small child which obviously excites the cheering crowd of paedophiles -oh sorry- I meant to say terrier-men.
Back to Top
YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE WAYS OF THE COUNTRY - YOU TOWNIES!
A quarter of our group was raised in the countryside. Two of them even had jobs as farm-workers! A Daily Torygraph (a pro-hunt paper!) poll at the time of the Foster Bill found very little difference in the percentage of people wanting a ban between town & country. The only difference between town & country I can identify is the strength of feeling in the country either way. Country people have to put up with their roads being blocked by support vehicles, their footpaths/verges torn up by horses and their wildlife and pets killed by hounds. We won't mention trespass in schoolyards, gardens, cemetaries, and railway lines!
Back to Top
HUNTING WITH HOUNDS BREAKS UP THE VAST PACKS OF FOXES TERRORISING THE COUNTRYSIDE AND CUTS DOWN THE NUMBER OF ROGUE FOXES.
Firstly, foxes do not roam the countryside in packs. The largest collection of foxes would be perhaps a family of 6/7. Once the cubs are fully grown they are kicked out of the family home to fend for themselves. Secondly hunting with hounds has a negligible effect on wildlife numbers as stated in the Monty Burns Report.
Back to Top
FOXES ARE A PEST AND THEIR NUMBERS HAVE TO BE CONTROLLED.
Anyone who lives in an intensively farmed and 'managed' (ie kill anything that moves which can't be sold or eaten) rural area should take a good look at the local ecology. They will find a disproportionately large number of game birds and very few natural predators. These predators, including foxes and raptors have been shot, trapped, poisoned and hunted over many years. Due to this 'rural pastime', there is also a serious problem with rabbit and rat numbers. People are now required to gas/poison/trap these species as well to keep the numbers down! Our natural predators should be encouraged to breed to solve this urgent problem and repair the ecology of the countryside. Some hunts (Duke of Beaufort springs to mind) have already adopted this philosophy by openly breeding foxes (sarcasm)!
Back to Top
FOXES KILL A LARGE NUMBER OF LAMBS AND CHICKENS (and small babies!) EVERY YEAR.
These hunters spend on average 3 days a week chasing a single fox. Animal enclosures can be made fox-proof if these same hunters could be bothered to do some proper work! Foxes are not magical creatures that 'leap tall buildings in a single bound', nor do they know how to use wire cutters. 
More lambs die of exposure every year than are taken by foxes. If farmers were that worried about the welfare of their lambs why do they encourage breeding so early (therefore suffering in the harsh winter) - is it perhaps something to do with lamb prices being higher earlier in the season?! How many lambs die due to hounds chasing uncontrolled through a field of pregnant ewes (a common occurrence)?
Back to Top
HUNTING WITH HOUNDS CONTRIBUTES ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE NUMBER OF FOXES AND MINK KILLED EACH YEAR AND SHOULD THUS BE IGNORED.
Going by the standard of hunts around this area this is most definitely true. However, by considering that only a very small percentage of the population get raped or murdered each year (thankfully) does this mean we should ignore these crimes? The argument is one of morality, suffering and cruelty - not of inefficiency!
Back to Top
HUNTING WITH HOUNDS IS A TRADITION.
So were badger/bear baiting, dog-fighting and cock-fighting but the civilised majority realised these 'sports' were cruel and banned them years ago. Cock-fighting was banned in 1849 but dated back to Roman times which makes hunting with hounds look like 'a passing fad'. The only difference between these 'sports' is the amount of money and power behind the pro-hunting with hounds campaign. The tradition and social aspect could be retained by going to Drag-hunting.
Back to Top
HUNTING IS NATURAL.
Normally I would agree with this argument when the hunter is a carnivore, but the statement looks a little weak when you consider the use of 4x4's, quads, shotguns, CB's, mobile phones, and binoculars to chase and coordinate an attack on a single animal. (Don't forget the hundred people, fifty horses and twenty hounds.) Hunters should run across the fields naked, grunting their directions to one another (not far from the truth) with a piece of sharp flint in their hands, then eat their prey, to really support this argument. On second thoughts considering the physique of some of these people - perhaps not!
Back to Top
BANNING HUNTING WITH DOGS IS RACIST AND A RESTRICTION OF CIVIL LIBERTIES.
Well done - go to the top of the class! Every time a law is passed someone's civil liberty is limited further, but this is normally done to protect another party's liberty who is perhaps more at risk. It is slightly hypocritical to claim racism when the pro-hunt lobby has such close affiliations with the BNP. (Check out the St George and Confederacy flags flying at almost every pro-hunt demonstration.)
Back to Top
BANNING HUNTING WITH DOGS WILL MEAN THE DEATHS OF MANY DOGS AND HORSES
There are many riders out there who have nothing to do with hunting - one or two are even sabs! Those that do hunt are often involved in point-to-point, dressage or simply go out riding for pleasure. When hunting is stopped these people are not the type to shoot their horses then go watch the footie on a Saturday afternoon - they will continue riding. Horses are an expensive animal to buy or breed and the accessories and equipment raises the costs into 5 figures - nobody but the insane would right this sort of investment off.
Each hunt in the country has about 20-30 hounds. Hounds are shot at the age of 5 or 6 when they start to slow down. By my reckoning that means that every hunt in the country shoots around 5 hounds a year. This excludes the number that are shot at an early age because they are not natural hunters or are ill/disabled in some way. It also excludes those killed when crossing major roads, railway tracks or other rural hazards.
Hunts moving to drag-hunting would be able to keep their hounds and may encourage more riders who disagree with hunting to join them. Hounds also make great pets and CAN be re-homed. They are gentle and friendly to humans but keep them away from cats, rabbits, chickens and wildlife!
Back to Top
A HUNTING BAN WOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE TO POLICE
Judging by the attitude of some of the rural police this is true and there would be no attempt to monitor the hunts. Putting that argument aside, the police, if acting in a neutral and professional manner are neither equipped or trained to monitor hunts. They do however have the resources, if Ashbourne Police can justify 2 riot vans and 2 police cars to harrass 1 van of Derby sabs! Prosecution of hunts would have to be by video-footage taken during the crime by members of the RSPCA, IFAW, LACS and HSA. HSA members would also be free to intervene directly.
Back to Top
HUNT SABOTEURS ARE STICK WIELDING, BALACLAVA CLAD ANARCHISTS
Anyone out there ever thought why there are no pictures of sabs assaulting innocent hunters? There are plenty of pictures of the reverse happening! Two saboteurs have already been killed in the UK (nearly three in September 2000) and injuries are all too common. We are out there for one purpose and that is to save lives. Balaclavas are sometimes worn to prevent identification and possible 'home visits' by the hunters. We are also out-numbered by at least 10 to 1 in most cases - why would we start anything?! If we carried any sort of weapon we are likely to be hauled away immediately by the police. It is funny how many perfectly fit big blokes of the hunt-support carry walking sticks or pick-axe handles when getting out of their vehicles! Sabs also cover a broad sample of the general population and during the week may be nurses, students, teachers, engineers, and even lawyers. We also treat the horses and hounds with more respect than many of the hunt support do!
Back to Top
BUY BRITISH.
Not exactly an animal issue but these stickers are common in the countryside in the backs of Isuzu Troopers, Mitsubishi Shoguns, Daihatsu Fourtracks and Jeeps... This is blatant hypocrisy when you've got the best 4x4's in the world made just down the road. If you're reading this Landrover - maybe you could throw us any 110/130 CSW's our way - we would be most appreciative (with sponsorship adverts on the side - of course)!!