Who is Foxman?    Why I support Fox Hunting   Why it is least cruel method of control of fox numbers   Why hunting is useful

Who  is Foxman?

I am  a pensioner who has  foxhunted for over 60  years. My jobs as an engineer for 45 years taught  me to respect logical argument rather than  emotions.

 Here I am on my faithful hunter "Cruise". He was   12 y.o. when this was taken. He died aged 18. I hunted him 12 seasons. He was 17 h.h. and a star performer over timber, hedges and ditches; bred in County Antrim, Northern Ireland, as a show jumper by Cappagh  Boy out of a Golden Love mare. He has won in Foxhunter's Showjumping  and in Novice Eventing. But he loved his Hunting most. I owe him  a great debt of gratitude for all the fun he gave me in the Hunting  Field. R.I.P. my darling "old boy".

 “Cruise” at Tidworth Military O.D.E. for the Navy Team (not me up)

Why  I support Fox Hunting

Foxhunting's primary purpose  is fun while providing  a fox pest  control service  and many other advantages to the Countryside and the general  population. Its, at present, voluntary  regulation  ensures that it is no more  cruel than  other methods of the fox pest control acknowledged to be necessary, by those most  affected; the  farmers. It gives great  pleasure to many people from all backgrounds  and income  levels. It  is an important part of the  social fabric  of many parts of the United  Kingdom of  Great Britain and Northern Ireland (the UK). Fox Hunting also helps control the  fox population where required by the owners  of property that foxes  kill.

The  death of this lamb, killed by a fox, is as significant to its owner as is a burglary. Some say that it should be ignored because the number of lambs killed by foxes is not significant economic damage to farming.  But would you agree if this was your lamb?

Foxes  also kill birds (usually all those in the enclosed space into which  they have gnawed an entrance). Chickens, ducks and pheasant chicks are  favoured.

Foxes  also kill piglets.

 Furthermore;  it creates employment and trade.  It contributes  significantly  to the conservation of the landscape and its wildlife.  It is well organised and conducted  according to strict rules. It  is supervised by the I.S.A.H.  (The Independent  Supervisory Authority  for Hunting).

These aspects  separately, or in any  combination,  would not justify Fox Hunting  if it were  evidenced that the  fox population would  be better off without  it. However,  all the available evidence indicates  the opposite. 
In areas where shoots, farms, wildlife sanctuaries etc. need  to protect  their stock from foxes (that is everywhere  except where  arable land  is totally  dominant and  there is very little game  shooting); foxes suffer a much worse fate where a properly organised  pack of foxhounds does not hunt  or when Hunting has been discontinued  or severely curtailed. 
Properly organised packs are  those operating under the disciplines  of the Masters  of Foxhounds  Association and under  the supervision  of the I.S.A.H. (The Independent Supervisory  Authority  for Hunting).

The MFHA and all Formal Hunting is supervised by The Independent  Supervisory Authority  for Hunting,  made up of  vets, ecologists,  farmers, etc. 

Hunting with dogs takes place in all continents (except Antarctica)  and many countries.  It has wide Scientific Support, for example it has been approved  as a method of scientific  wildlife management by the California  Fish and Game Commission and the California Environmental  Quality Act (CEQA) in  a State noted for its tough  stance in  protecting  the environment. 

If we are  to preserve Fox hunting  in the UK for the long term we have to get our message across to the "urbans"  to convince them of the  facts and of the errors  in the propaganda of the Anti-Fox Hunting Pressure Groups.

Why I believe that Hunting with dogs is least cruel method of control of fox numbers

 One "anti-advert" alleges that "the stress and exertion of  the chase  is traumatic  beyond imagination". If I believed this, I could not hunt. But I emphatically do not because foxes  are conditioned to being chased. Two British  zoologists  at the University of Nottingham,  (Chris Barnard, professor  of animal behaviour  and Jane Hurst,  a behavioural ecologist) back up observations that foxes  seem not to anticipate death and  appear not  to be suffering while being  chased. They  found that:

• Animals  who are hunted regularly (e.g. foxes) may well be conditioned  to regard the stress of being hunted as  normal.
• Do not  confuse stress with  suffering. 
  Stress is  a physical  condition.  Suffering is a mental  condition. The former does not inevitably cause the  latter. A marathon runner is  highly stressed but is not suffering  unless his stress exceeds anything that he  has experienced previously and has  not, therefore, mentally adapted  himself to cope  with. Stress  produces  adrenalin and endorphins which produce  exhilaration  to mask some of  the stress. Judgements in respect of animals about the  balance between  pain and  exhilaration  (both caused  by a stress)  are very difficult  and human analogies  are unlikely  to be reliable.
• The fact that foxes are fully  in control  of their  wits when being hunted is shown by the following examples:- they know how much scent they leave, how to mask  it by running through  ground fouled by cattle  etc. or water and  how to use  the wind. Also other tactics  too numerous  to discuss  here. They use these  tactics methodically while being  chased.
• An animal  may experience  the subjective  state of "fear", but that just tells it to  run, just as "hunger"  tells it to  eat. Fear and hunger only lead  to suffering  when the  animal's  adaptive responses  fail to assuage  them. Thus suffering  is triggered  when the  world frustrates an animal's  adaptive  drives (e.g.  to flee when chased). This subtle distinction  is a crucial  one that  has been  neglected byanimal welfare  campaigners  weak on evolutionary theory.

Other "anti-adverts" allege that  a fox caught  by hounds has a slow agonising  death. Many clips of "kills" show that  under the pack of hounds a fox dies in seconds otherwise"he"  escapes unhurt.

 Much propaganda alleges that other methods  of killing  foxes are "better".  300 Veterinary  Surgeons, Research Workers etc. disagree because all  fail at least one of these tests:

• Effective  and without unacceptable costs or impracticalities of application,
• Able and willing  to be limited so that  it does not decimate the fox  population,
• Safe for humans and domestic animals,
• Does  not tend  to degrade  the genetic adaptation of rural foxes to their natural  environment,
• Relatively  safe for  other wild  animals,
• Does not lead to  a slow death  or a relatively long period  of suffering  (e.g. when  frustrated  from flight by being trapped  in a cage).
• For  further details  please see http://www.vets-for-hunting.org.uk/ and this link

WHY  IT HAS USEFUL PURPOSES

In my view, Hunting would not be justified if it had no useful purposes other than entertainment. But it is useful. Foxes have  to be culled  to protect  farmers/landowners  animal possessions  against predation.The  Government  Bill reluctantly  acknowledges  this; however, they state that it is necessary  in only a few areas  to be decided  by a National Registrar. But a risk of predation exists throughout  most of the UK and, whatever the Government rules, farmers/landowners  will seldom be prepared  to accept it without  attempting  to reduce it by culling  foxes. The  Commons is  attempting to sustain its law that  culling must  be achieved by methods  it rules to be less cruel  than Foxhunting.  However, there  are very few circumstances  where other methods would  be less cruel  in all instances. Please see http://www.vets-for-hunting.co.uk and this link