Add Your Idea

Repeal of the Hunting Act

Comment 3rd July 2010

I Suggest a form of independentv regulation of hunting with hounds in place of the draconian and spiteful hunting act.  The latter was conceived out of hatred for those who hunt .(a very broad section of modern society, far removed from the left-wing idea of them being 'red coated toffs)Those responsible for drafting the hunting bill are hypocrites in that they are not atall concerned by what other methods the quarry species are controlled.  These can be as inhumane as possible , just as long as no-one enjoys themselves in the process.  The anti-hunters continually peddle the idea that 'people only go hunting to see animals torn to pieces' pieces'  .The facts are that, even pre-ban, few people actually see a kill or would not go out of their way to do so.  That is the business of the hunt staff, who carry a humane killer to ensure a quick despatch of the quarry.  Even when hounds were allowed to kill a fox or hare I can swear that this is so quick that even bystanders tend to miss the event.  Any 'tearing apart' is of the carcass of an already dead an imal.  A different matter in the case of deerhunting, when hounds are only used to 'flush' the deer from covert and brin g it to bay, (i.e. surround it and keep it in place until it can be shot by a marksman.  Many, many, injured or diseased foxes and deer are euthanased by hunts, which would otherwise suffer a protracted and painful death unseen in deep woodland , gorse or brambles.  It seems that opponents of hunting are quite prepared to accept this extent of animal suffering in order to score cheap political points against law-abiding country people. 

Why does this matter?

It is most important that the ineffricient and discriminatory hunting act is repealed because, most importantly, it has resulted in wholesale slaughter of wild animals, at all times of the year, disregarding breeding seasons.  Killing is carried out by many inexperienced people, who just like to 'have a potshot at  a fox', by snaring and poisoning.  All of these methods can involve the killing of other, harmless species, both bird and mammal, and the thought of firing a rifle at a pair of eyes in the dark has terrifying implications, yet 'lamping is a favoured suggestion as an alternative to hunting with hounds.   Hours of Parliamentaqry time were wasted in the creation of the Act and thousands of pounds of public money has been wasted in trying to bring about unsuccessful prosecution of innocent people.  This Act brings our democracy into disrepute.


1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)

Highlighted posts


Comment on this idea

Good idea? Bad idea? Let us know your thoughts.


Back to top
Add Your Idea