Part Two

I guessed that last night’s blog wouldn’t go by without someone disagreeing with me.

Before I reply to the points that people have made, we must remember that the bill won’t only outlaw fox hunting: Deer are also hunted with dogs – at least, they are here in the New Forest – and whatever the justification for controlling fox numbers, deer, being vegetarian, aren’t known for killing livestock. Their numbers do still need to be controlled and around here, that’s done very effectively in an Autumn cull operated by forest rangers, and a small number of licensed sportsmen, using high-powered rifles.

The supporters of hunting* defend it as being part of a traditional way of life: That’s true, and I’m in favour of not losing the old traditions as far as possible. But similar arguments were made in favour of badger- and bear-baiting, keeping slaves and sending little boys up chimneys. Just because something is traditional is not necessarily a justification for maintaining it.

It’s been suggested that controlling fox numbers by removing the source of food only leads to foxes starving: Well, yes, that’s what happens anyway when foxes die of old age – they get too old to hunt for their own food, the vulpine NHS’s geriatric care is even crapper than its human equivalent and they starve. It isn’t nice, but it’s the way nature works. A number of people (not only JG, who said it publicly) also commented that “this ruling won’t save a single fox???: That’s also true, if you take it literally – one thing we can all agree on is that everything that lives, dies.

This one is going to run and run, and it remains to be seen what happens when the bill is enacted, if indeed it is – there are still stages to go through, particularly if it becomes necessary to invoke the Parliament Act, as seems likely. Many riders-to-hounds have said they will continue to hunt in defiance of the law, and police chiefs have reportedly told the Patronising Prat** that they won’t have the resources to stop it happening – although if hunters dare to drive their horseboxes a couple of MPH over the speed limit on the way to the hunt, they’ll probably be pursued by armed officers and summarily executed at the roadside***.

Interesting, though, that the PP didn’t himself vote. Surely our big brave PM, who wasn’t afraid to commit thousands of British troops to an illegal war, could have expressed an opinon on this one? Or maybe Boosh wasn’t around to tell him what to think.

*For “hunting???, read “hunting with dogs, regardless of what is the subject of the hunt???
**Tony Blair, for the time being Prime Minister
***Hyperbole. Just.****
****And yes, I know that “summarily executed??? is tautology

Comments are closed.