morfe
|
Re: Polite notice for Pro Hunt Supporter
Sep 30, 2004, 15:24
|
LOL. No I wasn't talking about you Nat. I'm talking about extremists. Actually 'lies' comes less then shit, because screaming people have sometimes got more of a misconception to air than a reasoned argument, extremists on both sides of the hunt debate don't 'think' that they are actually telling untruths or resorting to violence.
I remember my father saying every boxing day:
"if they ban the hunt you'll have nothing to do" (he is a tacit hunt supporter)
I'd say I'd find plenty to do, like eat turkey leftovers and go for a nice walk. I'd prefer to hunt turkey on xmas day and not have to save foxes than I would save foxes on Boxing day and have to buy turkey from a factory farm. It's all backwards.
Actually, foxes are supposed to eat turkeys. Am I the fox or the turkey? What time is argh?
x
|
Cleira
|
Re: Polite notice for Pro Hunt Supporter
Oct 01, 2004, 10:49
|
cunt is just a daft word anyways ...
I don't really think of it in terms of fannies anymore
I'm sure we can come up with some other suitable insult?
|
Cleira
|
Re: Polite notice for Pro Hunt Supporter
Oct 01, 2004, 10:56
|
|
Tell you what, though - badgers are definitely on the increase big time and there's talk afoot of the damage they are supposed to be doing (spreading disease and talking to cows in an unpleasant manner etc). They might be protected now, but there be rumours about reversing that.
|
Noah Vale
|
Re: Polite notice for Pro Hunt Supporter
Oct 01, 2004, 12:26
|
|
eeeuuyk. That put me off my breakfast
|
Trish
|
Re: "Fallen" Stock
Oct 01, 2004, 14:55
|
I thought they meant ...'if we cant go hunting we dont need the hounds or horses, so, great animal lovers that we are, we just have to kill 'em off....' meaning there'd be lots more dead horses about. Thought it was a particularly stoopid argument... but so's the dogfood one too...
t
xx
|
Merrick
|
badger culling
Oct 01, 2004, 15:17
|
The government is on a massive cull of badgers. some farmers have decided badgers spread bovine TB to their cattle.
In many of the cull areas, TB has *increased* after the badgers have been culled!
People going and trashing the badger traps have been arrested under - get this - the Protection of Badgers Act!
For more on badgers and the cull
http://www.badger-killers.co.uk/
|
mojojojo
|
Re: Polite notice for Pro Hunt Supporters
Oct 02, 2004, 00:19
|
I used to work in a cat shelter, and the lovely local hunt wanted to chase the fox through the grounds. Obviously we all hated animals so they were more than welcome...pricks.
I once went to a talk about foxes - it was a long time ago, so forgive me if I get this wrong, but I'm sure that the reason that hunting can increase the fox population was this. Vixens have a strict heirachy within their area, and only the top one breeds with her choice of partner. If that particular vixen is the victim of the hunt the heirachy is destroyed and they breed left right and centre until a new one is created. Which means more foxes.
Mind you - so what? The fox as pest/culling bollocks is just a lame excuse for getting off on thuggery and sadism, so what do the hunters care? Grrrr
x
|
Merrick
|
Re: Polite notice for Pro Hunt Supporters
Oct 02, 2004, 00:49
|
'If you kill lots of foxes, they produce more cubs. Likewise if numbers are high, females will slow down breeding'
- Professor Stephen Harris, of the Mammal Research Unit at the University of Bristol, explaining why fox numbers remained unchanged in 2001 when the Foot & Mouth thing meant all hunts were banned for a full year.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3929441.stm
|
phil
|
survival of
Oct 02, 2004, 22:36
|
my biggest worry is if there is a ban on hunting with hounds, will there be a increase in the number of foxes killed by shooting, trapping and poisoning?
Hunting with hounds may seem inefficient but its always the fittest foxes that survive.
don't get me wrong but the point I'm making is that foxes will still die even when a ban is introduced but it will become less discriminate.
Phil
|
nigelswift
|
Re: survival of
Oct 03, 2004, 09:55
|
Hansard Debate -
"People feel that there is much misery in the countryside anyway and if the fox was not being chased by them it would be chased by something else. Hunting is their pleasure and they want to continue to do it. I argue, as I argued to the hon. Member for Mid-Sussex, that that attitude should not be protected in this day and age. We have moved beyond the point at which it is acceptable to allow entertainment that has prolonged animal suffering as its by-product. Hon. Members may argue that other practices, such as factory farming, cause animal suffering. We accept that those other practices also need examination, and that has overwhelming majority support."
I like that.
The majority is entitled to say they now wish to have a society in which it is not acceptable "to allow entertainment that has prolonged animal suffering as its by-product".
Is that an assault on individual rights? You betcha.
Is it partly fuelled by class envy, urban ignorance and vote catching? Maybe.
Will it add much to the total of fox happiness? Probably not.
Is it a small step towards a more decent society? Yes. Let's just do it.
|
