Fox Hunting

I don't like Gerald Kaufman much but this is just another piece of evidence to me that the Countryside Alliance is a front for a dangerous anti-democratic right wing mob


I saw on Teletext that I had been "jostled" by pro-hunt demonstrators during the Labour party conference in Brighton on Tuesday. Well, if that was being jostled, heaven help me if I undergo anything worse.
I was billed that afternoon to speak at two lunchtime fringe meetings. The first, at the Metropole Hotel and organised by three animal welfare organisations, was called to support the hunting bill, which embodies a ban on hunting with dogs, with which I have been heavily involved, which passed all its stages in the House of Commons two weeks ago. It will be considered by the House of Lords a week on Monday.

The second, farther down the seafront at the Thistle Hotel, was organised by the Palestine Solidarity Campaign and was part of the campaign, with which I have been actively associated, against the wall the Israeli government is building in Palestinian territory. Since the first meeting was due to start at 12.30pm and the second at 12.45pm, I had to get from one to the other in a hurry. The PSC laid on a taxi.

After delivering my speech at the anti-hunting meeting I met a PSC official, waiting with the taxi. Because of a pro-hunting demonstration, the traffic was blocked and the taxi couldn't move. We began walking towards our venue. The main road was blocked with demonstrators, but my escort and I made our way fairly swiftly, until we had to cross that main road.

At this point I was spotted by a pro-hunt demonstrator, a stout, middle-aged man dressed in checked tweeds. He rushed up to me and yelled: "You Jewish bigot!" He went on screaming this at me dozens of times; perhaps it was the only phrase he knew.
The commotion he made attracted other pro-hunt demonstrators, hundreds of them, who surrounded me, penning me in so closely that I was unable to move and could, to my repellence, see the pores in their faces, which were contorted with rage and hatred. All of them were howling at me, and a number took up the tweed-clad man's theme, offering such observations as: "You're an immigrant", and "You weren't born in this country".

I found their anti-semitism, though loathsome, ironically amusing, since I was - if I could get there - on my way to make a speech which would undoubtedly impel pro-Sharon Jewish chauvinists to accuse me of being a self-hating Jew and, as a lackey of the Board of Deputies of British Jews has recently put it, straying far from my Jewish roots. Those roots were, at any rate, easily apparent to the pro-hunt demonstrators.

This mob were, however, not content with besieging me with foaming imprecations. They began aiming blows at me, tearing at my clothing and attempting to pull it apart. One of them sought to rob me, zipping open a compartment in the briefcase I was carrying and delving inside for what he could steal. Another ripped my conference credential from around my neck, perhaps hoping to use it to gain admittance to disrupt Tony Blair's speech; though the security staff, comparing his face with my photograph, would have been able to see quickly enough the difference between his honest English countenance and my sinister semitic features.

While I was preoccupied with coping with the physical assaults upon me, my PSC escort, appalled at what she was witnessing, had been trying desperately to find the police. A plain-clothes officer eventually turned up, though this rabble ignored the warrant card he thrust in front of them. She tried again, and this time found several uniformed policemen, who, with me in their midst, pushed a way through the baying crowd. I went into the Thistle and delivered my speech against the Israeli wall.

Though there were times when I believed I was in danger of serious injury, I was not in the least frightened by my experience; adrenalin kept me going. This episode was, however, extremely instructive. It caused me to wonder whether those of my Labour colleagues in the House of Lords, such as Lord Bragg, Lord Donoughue and Lady Mallalieu, who no doubt will be opposing the hunting bill in the upper chamber next month, have any idea that the simple rural yeomanry, whose right they defend to maintain their traditional country pursuit, contains so high a proportion of fascist-minded, racist, foul-mouthed, brutalised, larcenous scum.

My encounter with this lot made me more determined than ever that a legislative ban on tearing wild creatures apart for amusement should be implemented as soon as possible. And on this it is I, together with my colleagues in the Commons, who will have the last word.

· Gerald Kaufman is Labour MP for Manchester Gorton
 
I do wonder whether this ban on hunting is really a payback for the loyal support for successive Conservative governments, by 'country folk'. Starting with the tradition of hunting, the Labour govenment may try to breakdown the structure of rural life and therefore its historic strength and support for the Tory party.

The figure of £750+ seems a bit excessive Songsheet, over here it's around $50 (£21) depending on the operator, to dispose of dead livestock off the field. Where its destination is after depends on what was the cause of death was, illness, disease or unknown goes for incineration, age or euthanization would be for dog food. Dead stock being buried happens, but is a risky business in both moral and fines as outside of the town boundary, all houses draw water from a well.

Derek,

"The farmers have been sending their human offspring to various schools to learn all about the delights of the various ways of eliciting unwarranted millions".

I'm don't know of any farmers that do that with it being the specific intention, perhaps you would be able to enlighten us with some facts and figures....in English.

I'm not sure what you are insinuating, but surely a subsidy system is in place for a reason, if it's not required, then abolish it. It's not as though the UK farmers represent the only country taking advantage of available subsidies and grants.

"from Europe (that nasty place just outside Dover)" Thanks for the geographical education, but it's not required.


Prince Regent,

I do think you are talking a lot from hindsight, but would agree with you regarding administration and bureaucracy. As many farmers see it, they would consider their time better spent working manually on their farm and not shoving paper around, but they will have to be dragged kicking and screaming into the new world and adapt, especially after recent events.

Farmers are basically, good, honest people, but like other people from any other industry, there are those driven by desperation or greed which in some cases is understandable, but unacceptable. Some may well have infected their stock for the reasons mentioned, but to be totally honest with you, the vast majority lived in fear and worry of it striking them. The farmers I am talking about are the 'regular' farmers, not the very rich who have somebody to manage it for them, or the big operations that mass produce the product, as Ford manufacture cars.

Profits in farming are being squeezed all the time and it's much more difficult to make a worthwhile profit. The result will be more and more large scale farms, mass producing to provide you with cheap food filled with chemicals, antibiotics regardless of whether it needs it or not. Don't bother looking on the label, you'll read nothing but quality, quality, quality.

As for Gerald Kaufman, how quickly he forgets the support he gave the miners and how gentlemanly their conduct was when their jobs were on the line. The guy is a frontline politician, I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't organize his little walk with the intention of arousing the attentions of some hotblooded yokels. Can't condone the actions, but he was putting himself in the position under the circumstances. Perhaps his next trick will be to walk through the Chelsea supporters when they play Manchester United with the full replica kit on and a natty red scarf. He is of course perfectly entitled to do so, but it wouldn't be the most sensible thing to do.



.
 
Funny that Griff, you've hit the nail on the head there. Why would an advocate of the hunting ban (who has made no secret of the fact whatsoever) walk slap-bang into the middle of a pro-hunting demonstration except to provoke? What a tosser. Out of interest, Ardross, thought you might be interested to read the letter of complaint that Simon Hart of the CA has sent the Labour Party regarding this arsehole -


Labour Party
The House of Commons
London
SW1A 0AA

29th September 2004


Dear Ms Corston

After several years at the centre of the hunting debate I have seen examples of stupidity and irresponsibility from people on both sides of the debate. However on Tuesday outside the Labour Party Conference in Brighton even I was stunned by the behaviour of one Labour MP.

Sir Gerald Kaufman (who as you will be aware has long been a public figurehead for the anti-hunt campaign) chose to place himself first beside and then inside the Countryside Alliance’s pro-hunting demonstration insulting and abusing protestors. I have a number of photographs and eye-witness accounts of his behaviour. As you will also be aware the return of the Hunting Bill has caused widespread anger in the countryside. The Alliance worked closely with Sussex Constabulary to do everything possible to ensure that Tuesday’s demonstration was lawful. The comments of some Ministers, especially the Deputy Prime Minister, have not helped in this regard, but Sir Gerald’s actions were of much greater concern.

His actions were clearly designed to incite demonstrators and bring abuse on himself, which he later tried to use to smear protestors. He could not have been unaware of the nature of the protest, and there could have been no reason whatsoever for him entering the demonstration other than to provoke an already angry crowd. The Alliance is determined that our protests will remain lawful and peaceful but, however much I would regret it, I cannot guarantee that angry people will not react to the sort of provocation Sir Gerald put them under yesterday.

Whatever the outcome of the parliamentary debate over the Hunting Bill it is certain that there will be many more demonstrations by the Alliance and its supporters in the near future. We will be doing everything within our power to try and ensure that protests remain controlled and lawful. I hope that you, as Chair of the Parliamentary Labour Party, might be able to ask Sir Gerald to refrain from provocation and incitement of protestors.

Yours sincerely


Simon Hart
Chief Executive, Countryside Alliance

cc. The Rt Hon David Blunkett MP
The Rt Hon Hilary Armstrong MP
The Rt Hon Alun Michael JP MP
Chief Constable Ken Jones QPM
 
And as a matter of interest, those of you who have said that I am scaremongering to say that not only shooting & fishing, but racing, may be next on the "ban it!" agenda might fancy reading the dossier that Animal Aid have put together about racing - Animal Aid (my arse) The Horseracing Factfile is particularly interesting, take a little look at their views on flat racing -

Flat racing
This involves sprinting along a course without fences. Many horses start these events at the age of two or three, long before they reach full physical maturity at about five. They are raced early because their owners are impatient to get a return on their investment. This is despite the fact that racing places an enormous strain on under-developed limbs. Tendon and ligament damage are endemic. As three-year-olds, the very few horses who possess speed, ability and stud potential contest the Classics and other valuable races. Slower animals run in handicaps and selling races. At these events, they can be sold on to different owners and trainers.

Also, cast a glance over the leaflet that these fascist wa**ers hand out in shopping centres on a weekly, if not daily, basis - Animal Aid's pathetic attempt to label ALL racing cruel

Now will someone tell me that racing has nothing to worry about please?
 
Griff,
I could refer you to the many official Government Web sites that cover this subject comprehensively.

It would be quite easy to cherry pick from them,passages that would back up my arguement.

On my travels i see many,many Farms and the most of them are remarkable in that they have so many New Bulidings on them and that they have.invariably,three or four new Vehicles parked outside.

Is it any wonder that we get the wrong idea.
 
For fuxake Derek, get your backside onto an English farm and you'll see decrepit, 20 year old Landrovers and people who work bloody hard for a living - what you are saying about farmers is insulting and untrue. You will not come across harder working people than farmers - out of the house at the crack of dawn and often not getting back in till late in the night, sometimes throughout the night.
 
Oh really - this is a new one - walking down the street is intended to provoke !!!

It is , as much as members of the Countryside Alliance and their anti democratic ways would like it not to be , a free country where anybody is allowed to walk along the street . That now it seems is regarded by the CA as inflammatory behaviour .

The idea that Sir G - one person in his 70s attacked a violent and aggressive and plainly racist mob is black propaganda of the worst order and frankly the CE of the CA's letter is utterly incredible . He may will have photos of Kaufman responding , who would not in such circumstances when under threat . Kaufman had to be resuced by several policemen .

The reality is that this incident and the dead animal dumping has shown the British public the true face of the CA and their ilk . It has been massively counter productive and makes a ban on hunting more likely rather than not . I feel sorry for the genuine peaceful pro hunt supporters but they have very unsavoury bedfellows, who they should be condemning , not seeking to excuse .

The fuel protestors were soon exposed as an anti democratic band of right wing thugs and the same people infect the CA from top to bottom . Was it not the late Nick Hagan who was threatened by some at a racecourse when he politely told them he disagreed that racing was under threat ?

As for Animal Aid , this is a joke . Their rantings are hardly government policy or likely to become so . The hunting is the thin end of the wedge argument is about as convincing as the proprietors of bear baiting and cockfighting arenas saying that all the theatres will all be closed down next not just us .

As far as I can see all the arguments marshalled by the pro- hunt supporters are scaremongering and seek deliberately to avoid the central issue - which is that fox hunting involves the pursuit of a terrified animal culminating in it being torn to pieces. To me that is barbaric - roll on the ban
 
Griff - as for how quickly he forgets how he supported the miners can you please produce any evidence that he supported violence committed by pickets during the miners strike . No you can't .

As for the miners , anyone with the slightest knowledge of what went on during that strike will know that there are and always will be very serious questions about Police conduct and that Orgreave for instance was a shocking interference with legitimate protest where mounted police went mad . Nobody should defend some of the extreme behaviour of miners in 1984 what appals me is that is exactly what some of you are doing vis a vis the rampant thuggery of the pro hunting supporters
 
Originally posted by Ardross@Oct 1 2004, 08:49 AM
Oh really - this is a new one - walking down the street is intended to provoke !!!

It is , as much as members of the Countryside Alliance and their anti democratic ways would like it not to be , a free country where anybody is allowed to walk along the street . That now it seems is regarded by the CA as inflammatory behaviour .



As for Animal Aid , this is a joke . Their rantings are hardly government policy or likely to become so . The hunting is the thin end of the wedge argument is about as convincing as the proprietors of bear baiting and cockfighting arenas saying that all the theatres will all be closed down next not just us .

As far as I can see all the arguments marshalled by the pro- hunt supporters are scaremongering and seek deliberately to avoid the central issue - which is that fox hunting involves the pursuit of a terrified animal culminating in it being torn to pieces. To me that is barbaric - roll on the ban
Regarding Kaufman, he walked directly through the middle of a large group of demonstrators hurling abuse.....wtf did he expect back from them?? He was deliberately trying to provoke a reaction.

And as for saying that I'm scaremongering - absolute bollocks. All ideas have to start somewhere, twent years ago it was dismissed as scaremongering that hunting would be banned. Already there are campaigns to ban shooting; NOT just Animal Aid, but LACS have active campaigns.

And please...the poor iccle fox is chased to exhaustion then ripped to pieces?? Do me a favour. It is a clever fecker who doubles back on itself, crosses it's tracks, goes through water, anything to mess up the scent trail. To say that it is 'chased to exhaustion' is a fallacy. As for torn to shreds...it's a natural animal instinct for a pack of dogs to do this AFTER THE BLOODY THING IS ALREADY DEAD. Have you ever seen a dog play with it's toys? They flick them in the air and then shake them from side to side, to 'kill' their toy. The first hound to get to the fox immediately flicks it into the air, breaking its neck. And what about all the chickens/duck/geese/lambs/domestic pets that the fluffy wuffy fox kills? Foxes DO NOT kill just for food, they kill for the sake of it. They are vermin. If anyone had seen the carnage a fox leaves behind after getting in with small animals, believe you me you would change your mind. Sorry Ardross, but your posts illustrate the point I have been making all along; a large majority of people against hunting are not fullt informed about what it involves thus are making snap judgements without any basis in fact.
 
Is it possible to add a poll to this thread at all? I would like to see a poll with the following questions if at all possible.

Old Ladies who are mugged in the street by thugs should be prosecuted for provoking their own attack by the hideous means of "walking"?

OR

Thugs who attack old ladies whilst they are "walking" should be locked up for the purposes of being buggered senseless?
 
Shadow Leader,
what have they done with all the rebates then?

Can't see why everyone is uninfomed and a thug or just plain stupid if they don't belong to the CA.
 
Simmo - Ha bloody ha. There is a big difference between walking down a street & going right into the middle of a large protest hurling abuse when you are known to disagree with the protest.

Anyway, I am going to try to retire from this argument before it gets out of hand and I am weary of reiterating the same points time and again for people to ignore them or castigate me for them when they aren't even making the effort to think about them.

Derek......since when did I ever say that? It has nothing to do with whether or not people are members of the CA.
 
With respect Dom - the general point you make is not a fair one . It is that anyone who disagrees does not understand . The fact that foxes are clever and do anything to avoid being killed and kill other animals does not in my opinion justify pursuing the animal across country terrified and exhausted and then it being ripped to bits - in my opinion it is barbaric
 
Ok, again James.....shall we leave it there? We both have very differing views, although I do still believe that it is incorrect to believe that the fox is pursued terrified & exhausted before meeting death in the form of being torn to shreds as it simply untrue. Howeve, we are not ever going to agree on this one!

Btw....I did actually state that I believe "a large majority" of people do not know the full facts, not that anyone who disagrees is ignorant!
 
shadow

u make a couple of basic errors in your posting

firslty you confuse how an animal acts naturally in its elements and how in acts unnaturally ie when being employed as a member of a hunt pack


no one is complaining that in its natural enviroment animals (predators) kill other animals (prey) the anti hunting brigade have no problem with this whatsover

what the complaint is ,and what seems to go right over your head and your beloved countryside alliance head , is when its done for some brutal morons pleasure and seeing the behaviour of the countryside alliance morons is the only word (printable at least on a public forum) way to describe their members

one excuse they give is that they are doing it to preserve the countryside even preserving us townies from attacks by these ferocius foxes and of course others let the cat (hopefully not in the prescence of their beagles) out of the bag and call it an anceient sport

as far as i can see the biggest danger to both us townies and the countryside is not the foxes whom after all are just animals and dont have the gifts that humans have are the countryside alliance allthough listening and watching the behaviour of the ca perhaps not all humans

perhaps it would be of more use to the country as a whole to reverse the roles purely as sport u understand set dogs on members of the countryside alliance and chase them to exhaustion and hopefully oblivion

and now we have a new twist

if you place enough morons on a street protesting about the forthcoming end to their sport leaving innocent people with no other choice but to walk through them if you hurl enough abuse at the person he no longer can be called a victim

after all do you know many 70 year old ment that would deliberatly try to provoke a bunch of angry morons i dont

unless of course its ok to attack and insult people whomhold different views to yours

which then going back to the morons of the countryside alliance is obvioulsy the case.
 
I starting to think the point has been missed.

Tony Blair's spin machine has us, and Parliament, all debating the rights and wrongs of a sport that brings out strong emotions from sides. Also his proposed use of the Parliament Act has those who care not for hunting one way or the other, but who are intelligent enough to recognise its inappropriate use, up in arms.

Meanwhile from Iraq, bodybags continue to be returned. Hospitals are filthy - MRSA continues to kill as standards of hygiene slip to unacceptable lows. In schools children attack powerless teachers, who cannot defend themselves as kids have 'rights' that Mrs B will gladly defend in court - handy that !

I could go on. Unfortunately while the only credible opposition in the country comes from within his own cabinet, he will continue to do whatever he believes will keep him in power, regardless of whether it is for the betterment of the nation.

I'll get back in me box now.
 
Would it be possible for someone to give me a bit of information on hunts please?

My limited understanding at present is that a "hunt" consists of people from a variety of walks of life within the rural community. These people use dogs to track down and kill foxes (lets stay away from any language about ripping apart for the moment). The hunt is, at least in part financed by the proceeds from point to point meetings.

The bits I do not have any knowledge on, and would genuinely and sincerely like to be educated on are as follows.

1. It has been mentioned that the foxes which are (to all intents and purposes) culled are the sick and old. How is this determined? The bit I'm having trouble with here is that I am imagining there being great difficulty in persuading a pack of (even well trained) hounds to discard the scent they have taken up and search for a new one if the fox is determined to be neither.
2. Why is it the sick and old foxes who are culled? As SL has rightly pointed out, they are vermin, surely the sick and old represent less of a risk to farm animals than young, vigorous fresh ones intent on murdering every last chicken in the coop.
3. Why can't we just shoot them a la deer culling?
4. Presumably point to points only supply a part of the required income - where does the rest come from?
5. Does someone pay specifically to have foxes removed?
6. What would stop the "owner" (if there is such a thing) from continuing to run point to points, and getting his free beef for the dogs when fox hunting is banned.

I am going for a lie down now, 10 paragraphs without sarcasm is making me feel quite queasy.
 
u make a couple of basic errors in your posting

firslty you confuse how an animal acts naturally in its elements and how in acts unnaturally ie when being employed as a member of a hunt pack

Firstly, I am not making an error. The lead hound breaks the fox's neck by flicking it up in the air when he gets to it. With respect, I do believe I'm in a slightly more advantageous position to know whether this is fact or not - I have followed hounds since I was 11 years old!! This is also a fact that I'm sure can be backed up by various other members of the forum who know about such things.

what the complaint is ,and what seems to go right over your head and your beloved countryside alliance head , is when its done for some brutal morons pleasure and seeing the behaviour of the countryside alliance morons is the only word (printable at least on a public forum) way to describe their members

Secondly - foxes are VERMIN. Their population has to be controlled. Foxhunting is the most effective way of doing this - ever heard of the Burns report??

one excuse they give is that they are doing it to preserve the countryside even preserving us townies from attacks by these ferocius foxes and of course others let the cat (hopefully not in the prescence of their beagles) out of the bag and call it an anceient sport

Oh please. Have you read Songsheet's thread "Just An Observation"? Foxhouunds/beagles/hounds in general are NOT vicious creatures in the slightest....for chrissake they parade them at country shows all the time & have children petting them, they have a lovely nature.

I'm impressed that I agree with you cricketfan, makes a change, eh????!!!! :D

Oh, and before anyone starts.....I said "try"!!!!!
 
SL,
In all those years how many times did you arrive at the kill at the same time as the hounds?

How do you determine which dog is the lead dog.amd,more importantly,how do you persuade the rest of the pack to stand back until the lead dog has killed the Fox?
 
Would it be possible for someone to give me a bit of information on hunts please?

With pleasure!

1. It has been mentioned that the foxes which are (to all intents and purposes) culled are the sick and old. How is this determined? The bit I'm having trouble with here is that I am imagining there being great difficulty in persuading a pack of (even well trained) hounds to discard the scent they have taken up and search for a new one if the fox is determined to be neither.
2. Why is it the sick and old foxes who are culled? As SL has rightly pointed out, they are vermin, surely the sick and old represent less of a risk to farm animals than young, vigorous fresh ones intent on murdering every last chicken in the coop.

It's not predetermined, it just generally tends to happen this way as they are far easier for the hounds to catch; as mentioned before foxes are wily buggers who will try anything to get away. The old/sick aren't quite as good at it as the young 'uns!

3. Why can't we just shoot them a la deer culling?

It's very difficult to get a clean shot on foxes using the firepower available to use, they are often simply wounded and die a long, painful death. High velocity rifles would be able to kill cleanly but are impractical (& I believe not permitted) to be used in public.

4. Presumably point to points only supply a part of the required income - where does the rest come from?

If you follow the hounds on horsback you have to pay a 'cap' which is an 'entrance fee' if you like. It can range from anything between about £30-£200+ (or did when I last knew the prices a few years back!) if you follow a pack regularly you pay a membership fee for the year, this in turn means you pay a redced cap every time you hunt. Most hunts hold the usua; fundraisers too, they tend to host balls & stuff to raise cash.

5. Does someone pay specifically to have foxes removed?

Not sure!

6. What would stop the "owner" (if there is such a thing) from continuing to run point to points, and getting his free beef for the dogs when fox hunting is banned.

The dogs will not be required anymore, and as Songsheet says you have to be licenced to dispose of carcasses. As for the P-t-P I doubt people will be able to afford to host them without the financial backing of the hunts.

Hope this helps!!! B)
 
Cheers SL, a few more questions (and perhaps some points) have now come to mind.

1. If it simply occurs (culling the old/sick) by happenstance then wouldn't a more surgical cull of those most likely to cause trouble be more effective in reducing the effects of these vermin?

2. They do use high velocity rifles to cull deer at the moment. I'm not suggesting that people wander about with an over and under loaded up with loose shot, but that a rifle with sufficient power to get a clean kill and users who are proficient enough to achieve such a kill be used - and wondering why they aren't? (and if I'm honest, suspecting that the answer is because they already have a hunt to do that for them).

3. Linking the last couple of points together. The dogs may not have a specific use anymore, but if the keep can be achieved despite the loss of the hunt, then why should they be killed? To achieve the maintenance of the costs required for horses, staff and dogs, all that needs be done is to continue what is done at present - PTP can continue because people will continue to want to pay to attend such meetings, the charity balls etc can continue because I know fine well what country folk are like (having lived in the country for a great deal of my life) - if you take away their charity ball, they'll only go and find something else to have a charity ball over, so why not continue it for the purpose it's used for at present? I'm quite certain that if the money was being used to ensure the livelihoods of staff and the welfare of animals was maintained that the "countryside" in it's current mood would do so. If this changes in the future then it will be gradual and fairly easily managed - much more so than say, the closure of Ravenscraig steel works which affected every single person in that area (and I mean every) over the course of one day.

4. Presumably the "hunt" owner already has a licence for disposal of carcasses - if he isn't altering anything about the way he's working then I see no reason to remove this licence?
 
Back
Top