Originally Posted by danielf (Post 34989936)

It is when doing so is inefficient, causes unnecessary suffering to other animals and there are far more humane and efficient methods of deriving said benefits.

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 34989934)

I don't believe that harnessing one animal's natural characteristics to derive some benefit for human activity is barbaric.

Originally Posted by zing (Post 34989865)

well I do think your reasoning is flawed there. The last examples hardly leave an animal ripped apart do they. Angling has never floated my boat;) but I am told the fish does not feel pain but I do think its a cruel sport

Originally Posted by zing (Post 34989850)

At the end of the day there are humane methods of maintaining the fox population and hunting with dogs was never efficient anyway. Barbaric to say the least chaing an animal till it can run no more then a pack of dogs tearing it apart hmmmm sporty

Originally Posted by zing (Post 34989997)

I do not agree with that level of breeding although I so not see blood and guts and initiates wiping blood down their faces at Crufts but I do agree it is wrong

Just showing me that humans can do horried things isnt likely to change my opinion is it? its just likely to add to the list of nasty things I know mankind do

Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 34990005)

Fox's are vermin and should be culled, if people want to take sport whilst doing it, it's fine by me.

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 34989868)

It saddens me how the mostly urban population of this country is so ready to legislate on countryside issues when the extent of their briefing on said issues amounts to a few dimly-recollected bedtime stories.

One carnivore tearing another to shreds isn't 'torture'. It's what happens. It's nature. Tell you what, next time one of the chickens in next door's run gets 'tortured' by Brer Fox, I'll post a photo of it for you, shall I?

Originally Posted by bjorkiii (Post 34990235)

Its the tory way , just look at some of the ways certain tory posters attack none tories even when then the story isn't about the forthcoming election, just a persons beliefs will have them straining at the leash against their views just because their political views are opposite :D doesn't surprise me one bit though, i know what they stand for and its not nice.

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 34989929)

It is population/pest control, yes. It is also sport, yes. Two different aims that are met by the same process. As for 'distress', well during the whole debate over the Act, 540 members of the Royal College of Vet Surgeons signed up to the statement that:

"Hunting with hounds is the natural and most humane way of controlling the population of all four quarry species" (the quarry species being mink, deer, fox and hare).

http://www.vet-wildlifemanagement.or...d=30&Itemid=32

... so, it seems, a lot of people who have expert knowledge of the subject disagree with you.

There you go with the anthropomorphism again. It's so ingrained in your approach to the subject that you don't even realise you're doing it. One animal cannot act with barbarity towards another. That is a moral judgement on behaviour that simply cannot apply.

For centuries, humans have harnessed and used properly trained animals for a wide variety of tasks. Using a dog to kill a fox is in no way different than using a dog to round up sheep..

Originally Posted by foreverwar (Post 34990270)

That's right, bjorkii - all Tories like hunting foxes, just like all Labour voters live in terraces and wear flat caps and keep whippets (when they're not out hare-coursing), and all Liberals knit muesli and wear home-woven clothing and sandals.

It must nice in your world of cliches and stereotypes, which mean you don't actually have to think about anything, just recycle diatribes and invective.;)

Have you thought of leaving the Labour Party and joining the BNP - that way, the average IQ of both parties would be raised......