Read RSS Feed


Hunting? The coverage seems to be one-sided

12:30pm Thursday 20th January 2011 in Read

SIR – Jon Burgess (Worcester News, January 14) didn’t read my original letter (Worcester News, January 6) properly.

The point I was trying to make was that hunt meets are deliberately manufactured around the general public as being nice affairs – and what more perfect time to do it than at Christmas?

If you see the video on the Worcester News website of the meet at the Raven Hotel in Droitwich, then you will surely see hunt propaganda at its best.

Before the ban, the Worcester News never published stories on the successful rescuing of a defenceless animal by activists.

The stories that you did see were the negative, such as activists being arrested for ‘disturbing the peace’.

Who disturbed the peace first? The hunt.

Why doesn’t the Worcester News publish the negative on hunts instead of praising them all of the time?

Why is it an offence to prevent cruelty to animals?

Why is it not an offence to gallop around the countryside, trespassing on people’s property and land with a pack of hounds and followers, pets being savaged, injury to their own animals, blocking of roads and just general snobbery and rudeness?

SIMON McCULLOUGH
Worcester

Comments(15)

crowquill says...
3:11pm Thu 20 Jan 11

............right out with rifle and lamp tonight! though if the moon is as good as last night I don't think I will need the lamp. Been meaning to get the old ******* taking next doors chickens for a week or so.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

tub_thumper says...
9:38am Fri 21 Jan 11

crowquill, if you have nothing decent to say then don’t say it. Stop using innuendo and sarcasm to wind people up.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

crowquill says...
10:21am Fri 21 Jan 11

Tub_thumper you need to look up the definitions of innuendo and sarcasm as I think you will find I used neither! Just for information I got the old dog, squeaked it up just after 11pm last night. It was a mangey old coot with the trots which is probably why it was taking the chooks rather than hunting bunnys!

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Cromwell of Worcester says...
9:29pm Fri 21 Jan 11

Perhaps if the two (2) sides of this most boring Hunting debate would give us all a rest from it say for the next 10 years .they be doing us all a favour

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

worcestermum says...
9:52am Sat 22 Jan 11

crowquill, any chance you could pop round here and get the one that massacred my children's pets on Xmas day? the one that continues to leave black poo everywhere and that will no doubt take the farmers lambs across the road and attempt to get to my goat kids next spring. they are not fluffy cuties, yes some foxes take just the one chicken to feed their family when its cold and they need to survive - others break into the coop and decapitate many hens but take none. Perhaps chasing them with hounds is not the way, but I'm all for a well aimed shot gun to do the job quickly.
Too many well meaning do-gooders who re-locate mange ridden town foxes to the country side. these foxes are defiant, confident and will attack our livestock in daylight when we've not taken the usual precautions to lock them away as we do at night.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

tub_thumper says...
1:47pm Sat 22 Jan 11

Ok, crowquill. What was the original letter about? Hunt meets and their use of propaganda. You used your comment as an indirect reference to the letter. That is an innuendo. The fact that you stated this but had nothing to with the letter is sarcasm. It may be a fact on your part and it’s something you feel you need to do but it had nothing to with the letter!
.
Why are you so worried about a fox taking next doors chickens? The fox is not a pest to you so why bother? It’s like my neighbour coming to me to say they have mice and asking me to put traps down for them. The mind boggles…
.
worcestermum made a valid point. Foxes take chickens to survive and we hunt animals for food to survive. I don’t agree with calling any animal a pest because they are just trying to survive. What worcestermum needs to be aware of is that foxes will aim to get one chicken. If they are all together in a coop then the other chooks will panic and flap around. The fox gets spooked too and kills them all. He will take one chicken and come back for the rest. But by the time he does come back, the poor owner of the chickens who didn’t secure the coop properly has already disposed of the rest.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

crowquill says...
4:04pm Sat 22 Jan 11

tub_thumper nice try but way off the mark!

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

pudniw_gib says...
8:46pm Sat 22 Jan 11

My hens got eaten by a fox, my fault, I still support the ban and think that all hunting people are total scum that should be hunted down and torn to bits and thrown down a well.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

tub_thumper says...
2:34pm Sun 23 Jan 11

crowquill wrote:
tub_thumper nice try but way off the mark!
What? Please explain crowquill...
.
Well said pudniw_gib. I have chickens and a fox got mine. My fault. I have no hatred towards the fox – it was trying to survive. I was upset about the chooks but that’s nature.
.
I grew veg last summer. The birds ate my lettuces. Shall I poison or shoot them because they are pests? Of course not! Can you imagine the consequences of my actions if I did? The same should apply to fox hunting.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

dominicbowkett says...
10:25am Mon 24 Jan 11

Hunting is cruel and should definitely be seen as cruelty to animals and not a sport. Dominic Bowkett.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

New Kid on the Block says...
4:28pm Mon 24 Jan 11

dominicbowkett wrote:
Hunting is cruel and should definitely be seen as cruelty to animals and not a sport. Dominic Bowkett.
When the labour government set up the Burns Enquiry into hunting Lord Burns said "Naturally, people ask whether we were implying that hunting is cruel... The short answer to that question is no"
So obviously not everyone agrees with you on that point.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

tub_thumper says...
10:19am Tue 25 Jan 11

New Kid on the Block wrote:
dominicbowkett wrote:
Hunting is cruel and should definitely be seen as cruelty to animals and not a sport. Dominic Bowkett.
When the labour government set up the Burns Enquiry into hunting Lord Burns said "Naturally, people ask whether we were implying that hunting is cruel... The short answer to that question is no"
So obviously not everyone agrees with you on that point.
You spelt INQUIRY wrong…
.
What you failed to mention was the committee's conclusion that hunting with dogs "seriously compromises" the welfare of the quarry species. The committee did not draw any conclusion on whether hunting should be banned or should continue. The committee did not seek "to address the ethical aspects of the subject". The Burns Inquiry report was welcomed by both hunters and anti-hunting campaigners. (This, of course, was before the ban).
.
Also, I would just like to thank crowquill for leaving comments with no evidence to support their claims and not answering my questions. I find this with hunt supports. You ask them too many questions and then they don’t bother answering them. Instead, they just mock you with sarcasm.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

mort says...
7:11pm Tue 25 Jan 11

People moaning about suburban foxes need to realise its because people dump their food waste all over the place, so of course something is going to come and eat it. If people just cleared up after themselves and stopped dropping food everywhere then the foxes would find another place to get food.
This fact was all over the news when that child was bitten by one and still nobody does anything...Except go on about the hunting that is!
Hunting was banned the middle class morons need to get over it and find something more constructive to do than rip animals apart using dogs, how they call themselves civilised is beyond me.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

New Kid on the Block says...
7:31pm Tue 25 Jan 11

I apologise for my spelling mistook but what I said was a direct and exact quote.
The Inquiry did find (in the four areas they studied) that the majority of people did not support a ban, in fact contrary to MORI they found only 25% of people would support a ban
Does hunting with a hound cause any more of a compromise to the welfare of a fox than a gun? I ask this because foxes are seen as pests and will continue to be killed in both rural and urban situations.
I believe that this is an issue that will continue to run and provide the WN with its annual flurry of letters and internet comments for some time yet, as there will always be people with widely differing views on this subject. Just as there will always be people out there trying (unsuccessfully) to persuade me to turn vegetarian or vegan.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

VanMan says...
8:00pm Wed 26 Jan 11

Quotes from fox hunters... "We only kill one or two a hunt, it's not a blood bath" and later on "it's a public service, we're helping regulate the fox population"...

What you're actually doing is all for you, having a day out with friends, dressing up smart, getting to ride some lovely horses, sipping sherry and making yourselves feel all important and posh when in fact you just have a sick hobby... end of.

It's only a class think because it's expensive and only rich people with time on their hands are daft enough to do it for their own gratification and screw everyone else.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

click2find

Most popular


About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree