I have been pondering a question that if Fox hunting is banned on the grounds that it is a cruel sport,
Will fishing also come in to the lime light as it was scientificaly proved that fish do feel pain.

Would the Fox hunting ban set a presidence for the outlawing of fishing for sport and who would support such a ban?

Well if it is proven that fish feel pain then we ought to ban that also,you cant pick and choose which animals or mammals feel pain.
Either its cruel or it ain't.

Since the fox hunting thing turned into a class war, I've been asking questions. The validity of greyhound racing is one of them. Oh sorry. That's acceptable. Doesn't involve the landed gentry.

PS. I was anti-hunt BEFORE it got out of shape.

I thought that it had been proven that fish do not actually feel pain if hooked in the mouth?

I can't see the government banning something that they have poured so much money into, and is THE biggest participent sport in this country.
Also, if fishing is banned, who is going to fund the NRA etc and how are rivers and waterways around the country going to be maintained?

If fishing involved tearing up and down rivers chasing after fish and cornering them and bashing them to death, then yes, I would support a ban.

But, in fact, fishing involves sitting waiting for the fish to come to you, you catch those daft enough to bite your hook, you weight them and let them go.

Alive!

--
JGH

Oh, that makes mugging ok then? Lie in wait, have your sport, release the victim. Of course!

Originally posted by Strix
Since the fox hunting thing turned into a class war, I've been asking questions. The validity of greyhound racing is one of them. Oh sorry. That's acceptable. Doesn't involve the landed gentry.

PS. I was anti-hunt BEFORE it got out of shape.

It would seem to me that a domino effect could come into play here!
Horse racing could be classed as a cruel sport as some animals die from injuries sustained in this sport.

I don't see why dog racing should be ommited from this as it seems cruel to me that these dogs are chasing a mechanical rabbit that they would never catch.....lol

Where will it end? Grouse hunting where they are flushed out and shot for sport?

If you think about it all sports that involve animals could be judged as being cruel by some people.

Originally posted by DerekH


If you think about it all sports that involve animals could be judged as being cruel by some people.

Hm, Rugby's next on the list then?

Originally posted by Strix
Oh, that makes mugging ok then? Lie in wait, have your sport, release the victim. Of course!

Sorry Strix, i've got to disagree with you here. I and many other anglers actually have antiseptic ointments included in their equipment just in case a fish is harmed in the process of catching it, and i have never heard of mugging being a sport.
Thanks to the National Rivers Authority (Mostly funded by licence fees), our fish population has never been in a better condition and our rivers are now reletively clean, to the point where otters etc are starting to return to them.

Originally posted by vidster
Sorry Strix, i've got to disagree with you here. I and many other anglers actually have antiseptic ointments included in their equipment just in case a fish is harmed in the process of catching it, and i have never heard of mugging being a sport.
Thanks to the National Rivers Authority (Mostly funded by licence fees), our fish population has never been in a better condition and our rivers are now reletively clean, to the point where otters etc are starting to return to them.

That's a much better reasoned argument than jgharston's.

If so then what? Deep sea fishing, horse racing, dog racing, pigeon racing, hamster wheels, gold fish bowls, circuses!

Originally posted by Lickszz
, circuses!

hasn't that already been done?

Although many circuses no longer use animals, I didn't think that been extended to all circuses.

I thought it had been made illegal to use animals in circus's now ?

I thought it was a voluntary thing on the part of the circuses. There was so much bad publicity in the 80's that poeple were boycotting animal circuses, so they had to change. I think any that do have to have regular rspca inspections or something.



:wave:

AAHhhh, Nice smiley Strix!, lol.

Originally posted by vidster
I thought it had been made illegal to use animals in circus's now ?

I'm not saying your wrong, it's just I thought there were some that still used them and I struggle to find details of any laws that make this illegal.

Originally posted by Lickszz
I'm not saying your wrong, it's just I thought there were some that still used them and I struggle to find details of any laws that make this illegal.

I am not 100% sure myself Lickszz, you may be right?

Personally I am in favour of banning fox hunting and angling.. although I don't think there is a danger to angling at the moment because most of the public haven't come to the conclusion that it is cruel yet.

However, if the public think one "sport" is too cruel to allow it to continue, then I don't think it should be allowed to continue just on the grounds that people are worried that it will affect other things that they like doing. Before badger baiting was outlawed, people who wanted to continue doing it used the arguement that it would lead to calls to ban other things such as fox hunting.

Regarding the use of animals in circuses, I think at the moment it is up to local councils whether or not to allow circuses with animals to perform on council land ie public parks. Last time I heard, Sheffield Council had a ban on animals being used in circuses... but I'm not sure if that is still the case or not.

Originally posted by Patchy
. Before badger baiting was outlawed, people who wanted to continue doing it used the arguement that it would lead to calls to ban other things such as fox hunting.

.

And! that is exactly where it is leading.....

Originally posted by DerekH
And! that is exactly where it is leading.....

So are you saying we should have listened to the warning and NOT banned badger baiting? I don't think its a bad thing that people are gradually beginning to realise that different kinds of cruelty to animals is unjustifiable. It reached that stage with fox-hunting years ago, but as I've said, I think it is very unlikely that angling will be banned until most people accept that it is cruel. And I think that is probably at least a few generations away.

I think that "factory farming" practices are far worse than fox hunting. At least being torn apart by dogs has the bonus of being "natural". I'm not saying it is pleasant or I'd want it to happen to me, but it is actually the way the ecology of this planet works.

Okay, arranging hunts and dressing up in stupid outfits isn't natural but neither are a lot of things.

I guess the point I'm making is there are a hell of a lot of things that are worse than fox hunting. I think that Blair is trying to push it through to appease Labour MPs and voters who are disgusted by what he has done in Iraq, and he thinks this somehow makes up for it.

The sad thing is, a lot of people do think it makes up for it.

Originally posted by Yodameister
I think that "factory farming" practices are far worse than fox hunting. At least being torn apart by dogs has the bonus of being "natural". I'm not saying it is pleasant or I'd want it to happen to me, but it is actually the way the ecology of this planet works.

Okay, arranging hunts and dressing up in stupid outfits isn't natural but neither are a lot of things.

I guess the point I'm making is there are a hell of a lot of things that are worse than fox hunting. I think that Blair is trying to push it through to appease Labour MPs and voters who are disgusted by what he has done in Iraq, and he thinks this somehow makes up for it.

The sad thing is, a lot of people do think it makes up for it.

As someone who gets involved with animal charities, rights etc., I can assure you that practices such as factory farming also have campaigns running to ban them. To not ban hunting on the grounds that it is no more cruel than battery farming is akin to saying we should not address poverty in Africa as there is far worse in India.

This ban has nothing to do with Iraq and everything to do with being part of the manifesto of 1997 on which this party was elected.

Of course its nothing to do with Iraq - that's my point. If it wasn't for Iraq though, Blair would not have felt the need to expend so much effort on getting this through.

Of course two wrongs don't make a right in terms of not addressing fox hunting because worse things happen ie factory farming. BUT, if I was an MP who was concerned about animal welfare I know which one would concern me more, and which one I would spend more time campaigning on.

Originally posted by Yodameister
Of course its nothing to do with Iraq - that's my point. If it wasn't for Iraq though, Blair would not have felt the need to expend so much effort on getting this through.

Of course two wrongs don't make a right in terms of not addressing fox hunting because worse things happen ie factory farming. BUT, if I was an MP who was concerned about animal welfare I know which one would concern me more, and which one I would spend more time campaigning on.

This is the third time it's been before the MPs and each time before now the House of Lords has blocked it. The timing is nothing to do with Iraq, we have been campaigning for this, with this government, since 1997, well before Iraq II.

As for MPs spending time campaigning for animal rights other than a hunting ban, they are. Remember a couple of summers ago when the rules governing transporting live animals were tightened? Or the banning of using animals for testing cosmetics, or the regulations governing the treatment of pigs? They were all campaings which were successfully concluded just not as well advertised by the press.

Things being referred to the upper house is the way our democracy works.

There should be a very good reason for pushing something through which the Lords have rejected. As far as I can see that reason has not been put forward yet, other than just saying well, the commons has voted in favour 3 times.

Originally posted by Yodameister
Things being referred to the upper house is the way our democracy works.

There should be a very good reason for pushing something through which the Lords have rejected. As far as I can see that reason has not been put forward yet, other than just saying well, the commons has voted in favour 3 times.

Whatever your views on fox-hunting, the government was elected after promising, among other things, to ban fox hunting. A vast majority of the MPs who have been elected by the public have voted in favour of a ban several times, and that in itself is a very good reason for pushing it through if the unelected Lords keep on rejecting it.

The unelected House of Lords is part of our democracy. Does the fact it is unelected mean that we are not a democracy?

If so, maybe Mr Bush might be in favour of a spot of "regime change" here, cos allegedly he is interested in promoting democracy.

If politics and policy really was about voting in a government to bring in a particular set of "promises" and then them doing it, we would be better off just having a series of referenda on every issue that comes up..

Fox hunting is barbaric passtime for toffs.

Originally posted by Yorkie
Fox hunting is barbaric passtime for toffs.

I agree it is a barbaric pastime... but that applies to all the people who do it, not just "toffs". Whether or not the person doing it is rich or poor, it is still just as cruel.

Yorkie, that statement typifies why I have sympathy for fox hunters - the people, not the practice.

I get the impression a lot of people are against it because "toffs" do it. Whereas if it was a good honest working class thing, like, ooh, to pick something at random, Fishing, they may not be so keen on banning it.

It should be about animal welfare, NOT class war.

Some of the best trout/ freshwater fisheries in England are owned by your so called 'toffs'.

Originally posted by Yorkie
Fox hunting is barbaric passtime for toffs.

I can't see you going out on a Grimsby trawler then Yorkie, and standing amongst a ton of riggling fish with one thumb in their eye whilst slitting their guts open and removing their livers into one jar and their roes into another and throwing the rest over the side for the seagulls. Then throw them (still wriggling) below!

Foxs hunting barbarity? Mere tiddlewinks to life on a trawler!

Enjoy your fish and chips! :P

Originally posted by max
As someone who gets involved with animal charities, rights etc., I can assure you that practices such as factory farming also have campaigns running to ban them. To not ban hunting on the grounds that it is no more cruel than battery farming is akin to saying we should not address poverty in Africa as there is far worse in India.

This ban has nothing to do with Iraq and everything to do with being part of the manifesto of 1997 on which this party was elected.

Would this be the same manifesto that promised tobacco sponsorship restrictions and advertisiing in motor racing?

I agree with the 2 posts above from Lickszz who says we should ban trawling and from DerekH who says we should ban tobacco advertising ... trawling and tobacco both cause terrible suffering!

But we should still ban fox-hunting as well!

trawling????where would the commercial fish come from???
don't think we could supply shops etc with men fishing with rod and line...stop trawling and stop YET ANOTHER INDUSTRY...
the farmers,the fishing......lets just kill off all english industry(not far to go know)...it seems to me that we are trying to destroy our own country....steel,miners,farmers,fishing etc.....

Humans eat fish - not fox.

Originally posted by Yorkie
Humans eat fish - not fox.

Would be interesting down at the local though! Fox Soup!, Foxtail in brine, fox steak, leg of fox...

Living in Devon I have seen many hunts leaving from various parts of Dartmoor and, while I agree that it is part of our English heritage and that many, many people both directly and indirectly connected to foxhunting will lose their jobs if (when) it is eventually banned, I still have issues with hounds tearing foxes apart for what is, basically, pleasure (despite the argument about culling foxes).

My idea of a substitute android fox has so far been ignored. Can't understand why.

No objection to a farmer protecting his hens or other livestock from foxes, If its causing problems then shoot it or whatever.
What I cant be doing with is the ritual of chasing the animal for miles, blocking up the escape routes etc. plus dressing up in idiotic clothes. The hunt supporters just use it as an excuse to brown nose around people with money and dress up in tweeds.
The sabs are ok, but they are all middle class sociology dropouts i.e. THICK. who dont mind if we pay their dole money.

Dragon

Originally posted by Killian
Living in Devon I have seen many hunts leaving from various parts of Dartmoor and, while I agree that it is part of our English heritage and that many, many people both directly and indirectly connected to foxhunting will lose their jobs if (when) it is eventually banned, I still have issues with hounds tearing foxes apart for what is, basically, pleasure (despite the argument about culling foxes).

My idea of a substitute android fox has so far been ignored. Can't understand why.

I am not 100% for fox hunting but looking at the bigger picture, It is a barbaric sport....so is bull fighting, so is the killing of animals in the hallal/kosher way.

The number of country folk who will lose their jobs through this, the number of dogs that will be put down, the domino effect to all small businesses that supply goods, clothing etc to the hunting fraternity.

As everything from shoe manufacturers to hat makers will be hit financially it will be hard times for some country businesses.

There could be a lot of arguments about this as to why people support blood sports but the uk arms industry does the exact same supplying killing machines for anyone that is willing to pay for them.

I don't see anyone putting a ban on them!

Originally posted by dragonsoup
plus dressing up in idiotic clothes.
Dragon

I don't go for this bit. The clothing is a traditional part of our countryside customs and heritage. People moan about losing out traditional 'Englishness' and then condemn people in the self same breath. Lots of people dress up as part of our traditions. I think it is the least objectionable part of Fox Hunting.

Originally posted by DerekH
the number of dogs that will be put down

The dogs only have a hunting life of 18 months after which they are put down anyway. They are also put down if they don't show enough agression, get injured in any way or look at The Master of Hounds in a funny way (joke). It's up there with the farmer who was in tears over his herd being burnt during the foot and mouth outbreak, he was going to send them to the abattoir so why was he crying? Loss of money, not love of his cattle.

Originally posted by max
The dogs only have a hunting life of 18 months after which they are put down anyway. They are also put down if they don't show enough agression, get injured in any way or look at The Master of Hounds in a funny way (joke). It's up there with the farmer who was in tears over his herd being burnt during the foot and mouth outbreak, he was going to send them to the abattoir so why was he crying? Loss of money, not love of his cattle.
I cannot undertand your comment about farmers!
Ok the reason why a farmer farms cattle IS to gain an income.
The same goes for all farmers that either grow crops or breed livestock.

Bearing in mind that a farmer has to feed and look after these animals with vets fee's and food bills before they are ready to go to market where he is told what price he can get from beurocrats to keep prices low.
I would imagine he would cry...after all it was the government inspectors that were going from one farm to another spreading the disease.

I take it that you are a vegetarain?
If not! would you expect for a farmer to work all day for nothing so that you can have your meat pie n chips?

I think that you have just shown your true colours as a labour candidate

Originally posted by dragonsoup
plus dressing up in idiotic clothes.

Dragon

Dressing up in idiotic red & white clothes? Sounds like an average afternoon down Bramall Lane, Mr Soup (my hubby told me to say this..... honest).

Originally posted by DerekH
I cannot undertand your comment about farmers!
Ok the reason why a farmer farms cattle IS to gain an income.
The same goes for all farmers that either grow crops or breed livestock.

Bearing in mind that a farmer has to feed and look after these animals with vets fee's and food bills before they are ready to go to market where he is told what price he can get from beurocrats to keep prices low.
I would imagine he would cry...after all it was the government inspectors that were going from one farm to another spreading the disease.

I take it that you are a vegetarain?
If not! would you expect for a farmer to work all day for nothing so that you can have your meat pie n chips?

I think that you have just shown your true colours as a labour candidate

The point I was making is that in the same way a farmer was shown crying over his herd being destroyed, implying that he actually cared for their welfare, the hunter who declares that his hounds will have to be destroyed should a hunting ban be brought in is being specious. He will quite happily destroy his hounds for the reasons I mentioned earlier so why he/she should pretend to be upset is beyond me.

Yes, I am a quasi-vegetarian in that I don't eat meat but what that has to do with anything I don't know. As for that bit about me being a labour candidate:loopy:

Whats wrong with Drag Hunting instead of the barbaric chasing and killing of the fox. The hunt could still buy and wear the clothes,they would still need to keep, feed and shoe their horses, they could still let the pack of hounds run,they could still ride and tresspass on other peoples land who are totally against fox hunting and the farmers that do allow them onto their land(usually only due to the hunt taking away dead cattle etc in order to save the farmers a bill of approx £150 to do it through the proper channels)would still be saving money.

I live in a place where this so called sport takes place every couple of weeks at this time of year and there's not many people in the counrtyside around here that agree's with it either........we have moved on............think about it?????????????

Originally posted by max
The point I was making is that in the same way a farmer was shown crying over his herd being destroyed, implying that he actually cared for their welfare, the hunter who declares that his hounds will have to be destroyed should a hunting ban be brought in is being specious. He will quite happily destroy his hounds for the reasons I mentioned earlier so why he/she should pretend to be upset is beyond me.

Yes, I am a quasi-vegetarian in that I don't eat meat but what that has to do with anything I don't know. As for that bit about me being a labour candidate:loopy:
Sorry max I was under the impression that you were a candidate from another post where you stated that you were at the count.
Sorry for that! I retract my comment forthwith.

What did upset me was the way that you worded the following.
[i]It's up there with the farmer who was in tears over his herd being burnt during the foot and mouth outbreak, he was going to send them to the abattoir so why was he crying? Loss of money, not love of his cattle. [/B]

The foot and mouth outbreak was devastating to some farmers where a few committed suicide due to the loss of their livelyhood.

I asked if you were a vegetarian due to that comment as it seems that you have little or no compassion for the farmers that deal in livestock.
Your comment as a mod is way out of line and maybe you should sit down and think before making comments of this nature.

Going off subject a sec!....THe farmers of the UK are paid a pittance for their work, to substanciate this I will give one example.
The supermarkets govern what price they will buy the goods from a farmer to be able to make maximum profit from the resale.
The EEU also dictates to UK farmers what they can grow and what they can export...this is used to force the UK to buy produce/meat from the EU.

Originally posted by DerekH
Sorry mex I was under the impression that you were a candidate from another post where you stated that you were at the count.
Sorry for that! I retract my comment forthwith.

What did upset me was the way that you worded the following.


The foot and mouth outbreak was devastating to some farmers where a few committed suicide due to the loss of their livelyhood.

I asked if you were a vegetarian due to that comment as it seems that you have little or no compassion for the farmers that deal in livestock.
Your comment as a mod is way out of line and maybe you should sit down and think before making comments of this nature.

Going off subject a sec!....THe farmers of the UK are paid a pittance for their work, to substanciate this I will give one example.
The supermarkets govern what price they will buy the goods from a farmer to be able to make maximum profit from the resale.
The EEU also dictates to UK farmers what they can grow and what they can export...this is used to force the UK to buy produce/meat from the EU.

I was a candidate, it just didn't make sense you bringing it into this debate.

I have every compassion for farmers who lost their livelihoods. The point I was trying to make (this is hard work) is that the farmers were pretending to be upset about the loss of their cattle on compassionate grounds whereas they were upset because of the monetary loss. Similarly, the hunters pretend to be upset about the potential loss of their hounds when they will be killing them, with a shot to the head, in the not too distant future anyway.

Anything in there you want refining?

Perhaps you should sit down and read other people's posts before you respond.

As to me being a mod :rolleyes: .

millions of pounds are paid in licence fees by fishermen / women each year plus more millions in tax by tackle shops and manufacturers..i cant see the government wanting to loose this income..if its cruelty your looking for stop the trade in el al meat

Originally posted by depoix
if its cruelty your looking for stop the trade in el al meat

What, you mean the stuff that's flown in from Israel? :confused:

Originally posted by max
I was a candidate, it just didn't make sense you bringing it into this debate.

I have every compassion for farmers who lost their livelihoods. The point I was trying to make (this is hard work) is that the farmers were pretending to be upset about the loss of their cattle on compassionate grounds whereas they were upset because of the monetary loss. Similarly, the hunters pretend to be upset about the potential loss of their hounds when they will be killing them, with a shot to the head, in the not too distant future anyway.

Anything in there you want refining?

Perhaps you should sit down and read other people's posts before you respond.

As to me being a mod :rolleyes: .
Ok max! they pretended to commit suicide.ok!

The hound and hunters bear little relationship to farmers!.....

As to you being a mod ..roll eyes!!..I am still an administrator in paltalk which has a far greater audience than the shefield forum by around 6 million from around the world.
And we do not go around with the Rolleyes attitude!
grow up!!!

Your reply that you werea candidate after your answer in my previous post is what I would expect from a labour candidate....all talk...no balls!

Originally posted by twinky1
Whats wrong with Drag Hunting instead of the barbaric chasing and killing of the fox. The hunt could still buy and wear the clothes,they would still need to keep, feed and shoe their horses, they could still let the pack of hounds run,they could still ride and tresspass on other peoples land

I have yet to hear a constructive argument as to why drag hunting could not replace fox-hunting. The feeble response that hunting keeps the fox population down and is the only way to deal with foxes is ridiculous. Farmers haphazardly shooting at them probably isn't a good idea either so I'd call on the army and it's expert snipers,give them a tranquiliser gun and tell them to go practise their marksmanship. No animals ripped apart, no animals left to die in agony as the drugged creature could be sterilised [no more growing fox population] and the snipers would get some rreally good practise shooting at a moving target.

The series Return to River cottage showed Hugh Fernly-Whittingstall being used as a human 'fox'. A good day was had by all and there were no fox's being ripped apart by dogs at any stage!