Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyboy
The Burns report was produced before the ban. It is hardly a definitive study of how the hunting industry has fared since the act.
|
Which is the point I was making.............................
Quote:
|
I think you have your contexts mixed up. The number of foxes being killed is not an indication of the method. In fact, more foxes are being killed by shooting, than by dogs. You are right though, that in the majority of cases the act is not being enforced.
|
The report, or rather the articles that the report refers to, infer that that as many foxes are being killed by hunts as before the ban, with the bans using the excuse that the hounds are latching onto scents of foxes and once that happens they can't stop them.
Quote:
|
That is not the fault of the act itself, but by the lack of priority to which the various police forces around the UK place on its enforcement. That is caused by, in some part, a conflict of interest in some senior police officers. Around here, the local Chief Superintendent is a senior member of the hunt, there has been suggestions that the police ignore their behaviour because of his involvement. Nonetheless, any failures on the police's behalf is not any reason to ignore the law and does not make the Hunting Act wrong.
|
It's a sloppy law, brought in for the wrong reasons.
That is my only problem with it. It has not been brought in for the welfare of the fox. That's the bottom line.
And if it hasn't been brought in for that reason, then why introduce it.
It has been brought in for the wrong reasons and that is why I consider it wrong.