Larger predators hunted to extinction
DAVID Weston's appeal for calm and tolerance over hunting, Points of view, March 17, is unrealistic to say the least.
Hunted animals have no voice, and it is our duty to do everything we can to protect them.
The ritual chasing and killing of small animals, as in fox hunting, by men on horseback, packs of dogs, foot followers, not to mention terrier men on quad bikes, is both barbaric and bizarre and is now illegal.
If the law was enforced adequately, the work of the hunt monitors would be unnecessary.
Hunters will always try to justify their behaviour with the pest control argument.
They forget that many of the larger predators, such as wolves, were in the past hunted to extinction.
If they had been left alone there would be a balance in nature which would make interference by man entirely unnecessary.
Joan Jones
Chudleigh Knighton
(by post))
3 Comments
by BN, Cullompton
Wednesday, March 25 2009, 3:59PM
“"removes the weak and ill."
Yeah right - so when the stag hounds are out and about they look for some frail old doe to chase rather than the more impressive stags - as if.
The clue is in the name.
As for control - one of the common quotes from the pro lobby was 'we regularly don't catch anything on a hunt'. So either it's not an effective form of control or they were being economical with the truth (nothing new there then).
I wonder how the natural world ever managed to limp along before man came on the scene to ensure the survival of all these poor species that would otherwise die out. All these animals have been around for thousands of years before man started killing them other than for need.
There are lots of 'minority interests' and traditions that we don't have any longer and now hunting should be consigned to history along with the other bloodsports (strange how it escaped the first round of bans when there were few 'common men' in the commons)”
by Will, New Forest
Tuesday, March 24 2009, 7:57PM
“She says animals have no voice. That is because they are not human! we have to remeber that they are animals!
Species do need control. To leave them to it is unsatisfactory. They die from starvation and populations go up and down massively. Thats basic population ecology that I learnt at Uni.
Control means that a population remains stable and removes the weak and ill. It is species specific and only targets the animal you are trying to control, unlike other pest control methods. Hunting promotes the overal welfare of the population as stronger animals have a better chance of survival.
Now, what about freedom of choice and expression. Tradition, culture and the protection of minority interests even if you do not agree with them? History and conseravtion. Hunts conserve more land than all the conseration groups in the UK put together!
Hunt on. Long live the hunt!”
by David Weston, Exeter
Tuesday, March 24 2009, 12:27AM
“I'm afraid that Joan Jones's reply to my plea for calm and tolerance seems to indicate clearly my point.
Whilst I respect her views, it is clear that there is no middle-way as far as she and others are concerned. Just the same as the hunt supporters, in fact.
I'm not sure if Joan Jones was one of those who, once the Hunting Act was passed, then started demanding the end of shooting and fishing, but there are many who take that view.
Being convinced of the rightness of one's cause does not mean that it is right to impose those views on others.”