Who is turning their backs on animals?

Trusted article source icon
Tuesday, June 09, 2009
Profile image for This is Exeter

This is Exeter

THERE is one sure sign that an argument is flawed when points are deliberately exaggerated so that they can then be knocked down.

Such is the tactic used by Dr Salvatore when he attacks my contention that hunting with hounds is natural for both hunter and hunted, Points of view, May 21. In answering his letter, I will ignore the jibes and concentrate on the debate.

I argued that hunting with dogs is similar to the way in which wolves hunt. I did not say that there is "no difference", as Dr Salvatore states.

Just as man has adapted the sheepdog to use its wolf-like instincts to herd sheep, but not attack them, so man has adapted hounds to hunt in a basically similar way to that of the wolf.

Of course there are differences, but the main contention is that both dogs and wolves use scent and comparable hunting strategies to catch their prey.

This can therefore be regarded as 'natural' and is not just my view but that of the Veterinary Association for Wildlife Management — a body comprised of over 500 veterinary surgeons — and published in the report The Natural Chase.

Further, such natural predation causes the prey species to develop avoidance tactics, which leads to maintaining their fitness and health.

It is a fact that no other control method can duplicate these factors and it is noticeable that Dr Salvatore does not mention his preferred alternative means of control.

Does he have one or does he hold the view that no wild animal should ever be controlled by man?

The simple fact is that the Hunting Act is not working. The first prosecution of a hunt employee has been overturned. The Act had to be clarified by the High Court, resulting in the few prosecutions in the pipeline being dropped.

After all the time, money and effort to get this law onto the statute book, it looks highly likely that it will be repealed.

Confusing genuine concern for animal welfare with prejudices about what we mistakenly see to be just "killing for sport" does wildlife no favours at all.

To then condemn natural methods of control, while advocating alien technologies that are not selective and can wound, points to who is really turning their back on wild animals.

James Barrington

The All Party Parliamentary Middle Way Group

(by email)

2
Tweet this article
Report

2 Comments

  • Profile image for This is Exeter

    by Will, Dorset

    Thursday, June 11 2009, 8:12AM

    “I think James is right. I would also like to point out that Hounds are an environmentally friendly way of removing farmers fallen stock (dead animals). The hounds are feed the fallen stock which recycles it and means it is not burnt which would populute the atmosphere yet more! I say carry on hunting!”

  • Profile image for This is Exeter

    by Will, Mid Devon

    Wednesday, June 10 2009, 10:50AM

    “Hunting schmunting, enough already!”

        Your comments awaiting moderation

        Add your comments

        max 4000 characters