The ‘Foxhunting Ban’; who should decides its future?

Yet as recent research by ‘YouGov’ confirms that most people in England still support the existing fox hunting ban, it clearly shows that the MPs seeking these changes are out of touch with public opinion and instead support the views of the fox hunting fraternity.

So the Conservative MPs, now claiming that this justifies the case for only English MPs being allowed to vote on matters merely affecting England, just demonstrates their disrespect for the real views of English voters; with the Conservative sports minister, Tracy Crouch, who is a member of the organisation called ‘Blue Fox – Conservatives Against Fox Hunting’, saying that the MPs voting to relax the ban “make a mockery of public opinion on foxhunting.”

It does appear though, that the Government is attempting to defuse the discontent in England, caused by the devolution of powers to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, by devolving powers to the English Regions; with them at present attempting to carve England into designated regions, headed by powerful mayors, with the authority to decide on maters such as allowing large housing developments or all day Sunday trading in their region; which might even include the ability to relax the rules on fox hunting, to demonstrate parity with the powers possessed by the devolved UK Governments.

We are now living in the 21st century, not the 16th when traditional British fox hunting began and watching public executions was also a popular pastime; now is not the time to legalise animal cruelty. The recent worldwide revulsion to the illegal killing of Cecil the lion clearly demonstrating this; a 13 year old lion that was being monitored as part of a conservation program and a major tourist attraction in Zimbabwe’s largest game reserve; that according to the head of ‘Zimbabwe’s Conservation Task Force’ “never bothered anybody” and “was one of the most beautiful animals to look at” and an animal known for enjoying human contact; that was lured away from the security of the Park to be shot by American Dentist and hunter Walter Palmer.

A man who boasted about shooting animals with his bow and arrow, but left this lion wounded and suffering for many hours before it was eventually shot and its collar illegally removed, so that it could be beheaded and skinned to create a hunting trophy for Mr Palmer; which it’s believed he paid about £32,000 for the privilege of doing.

However because of the worldwide publicity and disgust, he is now in hiding while American protestors’ wave banners in front of his dental surgery with words such as “Justice for Cecil”, “Trophy hunters are cowards” and “prosecute poachers”; with a petition containing over 10,000 signatures already having been presented to the White House to get him extradited.

Politicians can not condemn the medieval activities and atrocities fanatics are now justifying doing, while condoning unnecessary cruelty to wild animals, just to satisfy a minority of people with influence. If foxes are a genuine problem, there are far more effective and humane methods of dealing with them – wild animals experience fear and pain just like us.

It was Scotland, in 2002, that first imposed a fox hunting ban, through the ‘Protection of Wild Mammals (Scotland) Act’ , which was followed in England and Wales by the ‘Hunting Act’ in November 2004 - which was not enforced by law until February 2005; yet Fox Hunting is still legal in Northern Ireland. The ban forbidding the hunting of wild mammals, such as foxes, deer and mink with dogs however, did but not cover the use of dogs for flushing out unidentified wild mammals; or forbid drag hunting - where dogs are trained to follow an artificial scent; hence the argument that the present Act has been difficult to enforce and that the rules should be relaxed.

If it had got passed it would have been legal to kill foxes for pest control and for them to be flushed out by a full pack of dogs – the present law allowing hunts to use only two dogs to flush out foxes that can then be shot for pest control purposes.

Diseased or injured foxes would also have been allowed to be used for research and observation purposes – which it has been claimed by opponents, would have been exploited as a justification to do more hunting.

As the countryside gets swallowed up by housing developments, foxes will scavenge there and have to be dealt with; but this won’t involve people on horseback, wearing red coats, blowing horns, jumping over hedges following a pack of dogs chasing a fox.

Readers who submit articles must agree to our terms of use. The content is the sole responsibility of the contributor and is unmoderated. But we will react if anything that breaks the rules comes to our attention. If you wish to complain about this article, contact us here