Slave trade link to fox hunt insulting
W Cordy's description of the final episode of a fox hunt reminds me of the cruellest animal suffering I have witnessed.
After a fox hunt of several miles, the fox escaped into a badger sett and two men with terrier dogs dug for the animal.
On reaching the fox the two terrier dogs dragged it out, one of the men cut off its tail, then threw the fox to the hounds who soon devoured it. Anti-hunt protesters often film foxes being chased by the hunt, but are never allowed to film the final act.
When working in the Cotswolds, where hunting takes place, badger setts are sealed to prevent the foxes seeking refuge in them, which is an automatic process.
H CORNELIUS
Lower Batch, Chew Magna
Graham Forsyth's letter "Tory repeal of hunting ban would be a backwards step" (December 3) is completely absurd.
Mr Forsyth compares the practice of hunting foxes in the UK to the slave trade. It's worth pointing out that the slave trade has been estimated to have killed 150 million Africans. Does Mr Forsyth not realise how insulting his comparison is?
He goes on to claim that some of the people who now hunt may have had ancestors who were engaged in slavery. I am sure that all sorts of people have ancestors who did all sorts of things. What is the relevance of that to anything?
As for his statement that 70 per cent of the land area of the UK is in the hands of one per cent of the population, interestingly 70 per cent of the land area in the UK is divided into 300,000 farms, and these 300,000 farmers with their partners are one per cent of the population.
The pattern of land ownership in this country actually helps guarantee a healthy and vibrant countryside. If the currently farmed land area were held equally by the 25 million households in this country then each house would stand in a plot of about 0.6 of a hectare. The consequences of such a distribution of land would be dire.
It's actually far better from an environmental point of view for most people to be concentrated in towns and cities and for most of the land to be in the hands of the few people who are engaged in food production.
Finally, as far as Mr Forsyth's worry about 70 per cent of the profits being taken by one per cent of the population, I fail to see how this is relevant. The average income per farm is about £20,000, which is less than the national average.
GILES BRADSHAW
Whippenscott
Rose Ash
3 Comments
by Sarah, colchester
Tuesday, December 15 2009, 10:02AM
“Let me tell you the fox is not dead when it is dragged out of its den and the huntsmen could not care less if the fox is alive or not they will cut the tail off before it is thrown to the dogs i have witnessed this first hand and that is why I am so against it - its cruel and unfair - foxes are even bred to hunt, badgers setts are blocked (i watched the local hunt blocking the setts the other day from my bedroom window and reported them to the police. Pro hunters have no idea what evil people fox hunters are and yes i do live in the countryside and own both sheep and chickens so I do know what i'm talking about”
by NORMAN BRYANT, West Sussex
Friday, December 11 2009, 6:19PM
“Such a minor detail to be left out of the story but one which is very important that the Fox is long dead before it's Brush is cut off or thrown to the Hounds, it's like saying a person is burned to death or is burnt only when dead (cremation) incidently it is illegal to dig out a fox which goes to ground in a Badger Set and would be very dificult to find in one”
by Sarah, Surrey
Thursday, December 10 2009, 11:11PM
“H Cornelius omits one thing from this story, which I have myself witnessed on other occasions - the fox is already dead before it is "dragged out..."
The fox is brought to bay by the terrier, the terrierman shoots the fox with a humane killer, the terrier is then sometimes allowed to pull the dead fox out and then its body is thrown to the hounds. Very grisly, but nature is seldom pretty, and frankly I don't lose much sleep over the "suffering" experienced by a dead body.
The shooting of a fox which has gone to ground is permitted under the idiotic Hunting Act, by the way, so the whole process as described by H Cornelius, including the removal of the brush and the consumption of the body by the hounds, is still actually completely legal.”