Fox hunting
Fox hunting is a form of hunting for foxes using a pack of scent hounds. The pack is often followed by riders on horses. Like all forms of hunting, fox hunting is a blood sport, and as such it is controversial and has been outlawed in some countries. Many animal welfare activists believe that fox hunting is a cruel sport and should be banned, while pro-hunters argue that it is an effective method of vermin control.
The animals
Foxhounds (of the Foxhound or Harrier breeds) are specially bred and trained for the purpose of fox hunting. In the course of a hunt, hounds are directed (or "cast") towards areas (known as "coverts") deemed likely to contain foxes. If the foxhound pack manages to pick up the scent of a fox, they will follow it and the horses and riders will follow the hounds by the most direct route possible. The horses may jump over any obstacles in their way; indeed, this is the origin of the term National Hunt for horseracing over jumps. The hunt continues either until the fox evades the hounds, goes to ground, or is overtaken and killed by the hounds. In the United Kingdom, where the fox is the largest predator, it is legally considered vermin and a fox that goes to ground may be dug out of its hole and shot at the request of the landowner or tenant. In America there are many predators larger than foxes and so fox numbers are not nearly as dense, nor are they as serious a problem in most areas to livestock farmers. As a result, fox hunting in America does not have a primary goal of killing their quarry and kills are rare.
The people
Hunts are generally governed by one or more Masters, who typically take much of the financial responsibility for the overall management of the hunt. Hunts typically employ a huntsman who is responsible (in conjunction with assistants, known as "whippers-in") for directing the hounds in the course of a hunt.
Mounted hunt followers typically wear traditional hunting costumes. The scarlet coats often worn by huntsmen, masters, whippers-in and other officials are sometimes called "Pinks". Various theories about the derivation of this term have been advanced, ranging from the colour of a weathered scarlet coat to the name of a purportedly famous tailor. These theories are discussed in detail on the Horse Country article in the external links section.
As of November 2004, there were 318 registered hound packs in England and Wales. Estimates reported by The Guardian noted 8000 jobs depend on the hunt.
The role of "whipper-in" in hunts has inspired some parliamentary systems (including the Westminster System and the U.S. Congress) to use "whip" for a member who enforces party discipline and ensure the attendance of other members at important votes.
History
Using scenthounds to track prey dates back to Assyrian, Babylonian and Egyptian times, and is known as venery. In England, hunting with hounds was popular before the Romans arrived, using the Agassaei breed. The Romans brought their Castorian and Fulpine hound breeds, along with importing the brown hare (the mountain hare is native) and additional species of deer as quarry. Wild boar was also hunted. The Norman hunting traditions were added when William the Conqueror arrived, along with the Gascon and Talbot hounds. By 1340 the four beasts of venery were the hare, the hart, the wolf and the wild boar. The five beasts of the chase were the buck, the doe, the fox, the marten and the roe.
The earliest known attempt to hunt a fox with hounds was in Norfolk, England, in 1534, where farmers began chasing down foxes with their dogs as pest control. By the end of the seventeenth century many organized packs were hunting both hare and fox, and during the eighteenth century packs specifically for fox hunting were appearing. The passing of the Enclosure Acts from 1760 to 1840 had made hunting deer much more difficult in many areas of the country, as that requires great areas of open land. Also, the new fences made jumping the obstacles separating the fields part of the hunting tradition. With the onset of the Industrial Revolution, people began to move out of the country and into towns and cities to find work. Roads, rail and canals split the hunting country, but also made hunting accessible to more people. Shotguns were improved during the nineteenth century and game shooting became more popular. To protect the pheasants for the shooters, gamekeepers culled the foxes almost to extirpation in popular areas, which caused the huntsmen to improve their coverts. Finally the Game Laws were relaxed in 1831 and later abolished, which meant anyone could obtain a permit to take rabbits, hares and gamebirds.
Although viewed as a typically traditional rural British activity, hunting with hounds takes place all over the world. Hunts in the United States, Canada, Ireland and India are legacies of the British Empire to some extent, although some claim that the first pack devoted to hunting only fox was located in the United States. In 2004 the Masters of Foxhounds Association of America included 170 registered packs in the US and Canada, and there are many additional farmer (non-recognized) packs.
Many other Greek- and Roman-influenced countries have their own long tradition of hunting with hounds. France and Italy for example, have thriving fox hunts. In Switzerland and Germany, where fox hunting was once popular, the activity has been outlawed, although Germany continues to allow deer to be driven by dogs to guns. In some countries drag hunting is also popular, either instead of or in addition to quarry hunting, in which a scented bag is dragged over a pre-determined course. Bloodhounds are used in some areas to hunt the "clean boot", a human runner, for sport.
When fox hunting in the United States, the fox is rarely caught. In fact, much effort goes into training the foxes so that they do not get caught. In the summer of the year, the hunt take the young hounds out "cubbing". They teach the puppies to hunt while they are teaching the young foxes to give chase. In Britain "cubbing" consists of interesting the young hounds in hunting by setting them upon fox cubs, which are easier to catch and kill than adults.
Hunting bans in the UK
England and Wales: The Hunting Act 2004
Anti-hunting protests became more prevalent during the Great Depression, and after the Second World War the British government held the Scott Henderson inquiry about cruelty to British wild mammals. That report judged that shooting, gassing, trapping and poisoning caused greater suffering than hunting, and therefore hunting should continue.
The Labour Party manifesto of 1997 pledged "a free vote in Parliament on whether hunting with hounds should be banned by legislation". A private member's bill which would have banned all hunting of wild mammals with dogs was introduced by Michael Foster, Labour MP for Worcester, and won the support of a majority of members of the House of Commons. The bill later ran out of time before clearing the House of Commons. Had the Bill reached the House of Lords it would have faced strong opposition there.
In 1999 Home Secretary Jack Straw arranged for a six-month government Committee of Inquiry into Hunting with Dogs in England and Wales. Chaired by Lord Burns, the Committee presented its Final Report to Parliament in June 2000. It was not part of Burns' remit to support or oppose a ban on hunting, but to clear up some of the disputed issues surrounding the issue. Among his other findings, Burns found that banning hunting would have little effect on the number of foxes, and that the number of jobs likely to be lost by a ban was about 700. On the issue of animal welfare, Burns reported that hunting "seriously compromises the welfare of the fox" but that alternative methods of fox control were worse, with the 'tentative' exception of lamping in areas in which that method was possible.
The 2001 Labour manifesto contained a promise to allow "Parliament to reach a conclusion on this issue". In 2003, the government introduced its own Bill which would have instituted a system of licensing and regulation of hunting. However, anti-hunting MPs passed a series of amendments to introduce a total ban on hunting with exemptions only for rats, rabbits, and raptors (falconry). The government initially described these as 'wrecking amendments' but later accepted them as the will of the House of Commons. This Bill did not complete its stages in the House of Lords.
In the next session in 2004 the government re-introduced the Bill in exactly the same form and it passed through the Commons in one day in September, together with a 'suggested amendment' under the Parliament Act procedure that would have delayed the ban for 18 months until July 31, 2006, if accepted by the Lords. This Government argued for such a delay as an opportunity for hunts to wind down or adapt before the ban came into force; hunt supporters believed that its primary purpose was to prevent the ban and associated protests from coming into effect a few months before the expected general election in May 2005.
The House of Lords passed a series of amendments to return the Bill to the original government Bill of 2003 for licensing and regulation. Under this proposal, hunting would only be able to take place if they could show "utility" (a need to reduce the local fox population) and "least suffering" (lack of any alternative procedure involving less suffering to the quarry than hunting). The Lords amendments included delaying the Bill coming into force until at least December 1, 2007 after the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons had reported on whether hunting involved more or less suffering than the alternatives.
The Commons disagreed with those amendments and insisted on the total ban bill. On November 17 the Lords insisted on its amendments to the main bill, though it varied their suggested delay until 2007 to decouple it from any RCVS report. This time it was presented as a fairer opportunity for hunts to wind down than the 18 month delay. The next day was the last day of the Parliamentary session. In the Commons, the government's last-ditch attempt to compromise on a delay until July 31, 2007 won the support of only 46 MPs, although the delay until 2006 was inserted in the Bill. The Lords would have had to have accepted the Commons' other amendments (including the principle of a ban on hunting) in order for this delay to have been approved, and therefore rejected them by 153 to 114.
When the Lords and Commons were unable to come to agreement by the end of the Parliamentary year on November 18, the Parliament Act was invoked, and the banning bill received Royal Assent that evening, becoming the Hunting Act 2004. With no agreement on the 'suggested amendment' to delay the ban, it will come into force three calendar months after Royal Assent - February 18, 2005.
There have been a series of declarations by various groups of hunting activists (most notably the Countryside Alliance) that they will still go hunting in defiance of the law and it is expected that pro-hunting groups will mount several legal challenges to the Hunting Act 2004 (both in the British High Court and European Court of Human Rights). These are expected to include, a ruling on the legality of the Parliament Act itself, and a quite seperate challenge as to whether the anti-hunting legislation contravenes individual property rights protected in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
Scotland
In February of 2002 the devolved Scottish Parliament voted by 83 to 36 to ban hunting with dogs. MSPs decided not to give compensation to those whose livelihoods or businesses might suffer as a result of the ban. An article in the Guardian on 9 September 2004 reports that of the 10 Scottish hunts, 9 have survived the ban, as it is still possible to use hounds to flush foxes to guns. As a result, the total number of foxes killed by hunts has doubled because even the healthy foxes rarely escape the bullets.
Controversy over Hunting
There are many arguments on all sides of the debate. Not all arguments are used by all advocates of each view, and almost all views stated are disputed by the opposing party.
Pro-Hunt Arguments
It is argued that no law should curtail the right to do as you wish so long as it does not harm other humans.
Utility
That controlling fox numbers is necessary, to protect livestock vulnerable to attack by foxes.
Animal Welfare
That hunting is more humane than the alternative methods of fox control.
Community
That hunting is an integral part of rural communities, and that it is a prime example of co-operative working across classes.
The Middle Way Group
The Parliamentary Middle Way group favours the continuation of hunting under a strict licensing scheme managed by a statutory authority; they argue for this position on both animal welfare and civil liberties grounds. They state that each hunt should apply for a licence to and show that their method of quarry control involves less suffering than any alternative method.
They have commissioned research into The Welfare Aspects of Shooting Foxes, showing the wounding rates caused by different types of fox-control with guns.
Anti-Hunt Arguments
Civil Liberties
This is an unusual use of the term "civil liberties"; one more usually hears the term used to refer to those liberties whose curtailment threatens the functioning of democracy itself, such as freedom of speech or freedom of assembly. One may find many references, for example, to drug prohibition resulting in unreasonable curtailment of civil liberties (by eg resulting in unreasonable search and seizure powers), but it is rare to hear it argued that it is a curtailment of civil liberties in and of itself, because while it may be seen as a form of liberty it isn't seen specifically as a civil liberty.
Parliament has on several occasions in the recent past passed Acts whose purpose was to improve animal welfare or reduce animal cruelty without being faced with large demonstrations arguing that these Acts represented an unreasonable curtailment of civil liberties.
Hunting is unnecessary
Fox numbers are primarily controlled by the resources available as with any animal population, and hunting does not have a significant effect—indeed, many more foxes are killed on the roads than by hunting.
Hunting is cruel
There are more humane methods of control if required, especially where those applying those methods of control are appropriately trained.
Community
If it were conceded that Parliament has the right to legislate to reduce animal cruelty, and if it were conceded that fox hunting was cruel, then few would argue that the practice should nevertheless continue either in the interests of maintaining community or preserving jobs; conversely, if it were found that fox hunting minimized animal cruelty then there would be no case against it. Given this, it is unclear what arguments that do not address the central issue of cruelty add to the debate. However, it should be noted that anti-hunt activists dispute both the likely job losses resulting from a ban and the likely effect on community put forward by pro-hunt organisations.
Class issues
Some of the hostility towards fox hunting stems from public perception of fox hunters as typifying a disliked aspect of the upper classes. Oscar Wilde once characterised hunting as "The English country gentleman galloping after a fox—the unspeakable in pursuit of the uneatable", and the British anarchist group Class War used to argue explicitly for disruption of the hunt on class warfare grounds. Those who support the hunt say that this is the main motivating factor in their opposition (eg Baroness Mallalieu: "[the Bill's] foundations are naked prejudice and wilful ignorance"), while nearly all those who oppose it will argue that their primary motivation is animal welfare concerns.
External links
- News reports
- Hunting and pro-hunting organisations
- Anti-hunting organisations
- Other organisations
- The Parliamentary Middle Way Group (UK)
- Committee of Inquiry into Hunting with Dogs in England and Wales (UK Government enquiry)
- Progress of the Hunting Bill through Parliament in 2004 (Houses of Parliament Bill Index Database - Links to Hansard
- Directories
- References
- JNP Watson, The Book of Foxhunting (Batsford, 1977) ISBN 0713408073
- House of Lords speech by Lord Burns, chairman of the official Inquiry, explaining his position against a ban on October 12, 2004
- Horse Country - The Legend of Tailor Pink
- Guardian - Special Report: Hunting
- BBC News - Hunting with Dogs Debate
- CBBC - Fox Hunting (information aimed at children)