At 14:37:27 on 24.01.10, Angelalain wrote:
Wasn't at all sure what to title this! Yesterday morning my daughter went into our very dark hay shed and got a shock. Sticking out from behind the bale of straw she was about to pick up she saw what she correctly took to be a foxes brush. She approched very carefully, not wanting to be bitten by an injured fox, but in fact it was dead. When she got it outside the poor beast (and no I'm neither a lover nor hater of foxes) had been shot. Its hind leg was broken where it had been hit around the stifle area, the leg was twice the size of the other and the wound was going green. It was a big, and had probably been a healthy, dog fox. Poor blighter had probably been suffering for days. My point here is when will those 'ban the hunting' idiots realise that banning hunting does not stop foxes from being killed. We live in a shooting area, and both the chicken farmers and gamekeepers hate foxes, hence, they shoot them, and not very effectively!At least if hunted (which would be natural for a fox had we still got any larger predators) the fox would either live or die, not drag himself off injured. We've got some nature do-gooders wanting to reintroduce the Sea Eagle on the Norfolk coast!! How long do they honestly think it will be before someone shoots them too (if they ever get round to it)

At 19:12:39 on 29.04.10, JessAndGrenville123 wrote:
Poor fox but isn't it better alive and not killed either way? Don't kill animals, problem solved!

At 21:00:28 on 29.04.10, NMH wrote:
Jess your idealism is all very well but you have to be realistic - foxes ARE going to be killed by farmers, gamekeepers etc & it is truly better to be hunted than shot or trapped or gassed or poisoned

At 21:27:21 on 29.04.10, JessAndGrenville123 wrote:
But there is no need to kill them most foxes that are hunted havn't been near a farm, on all my rides i have seen about 2 foxes ever, there are not too many, however killing them has meant there is now too many pheasants. We are screwing up the wild food chain.

At 07:00:29 on 30.04.10, Angelalain wrote:
I realise you are very young, but get real! The Pheasants are commercial, for shooting, hence you will n ot see foxes because the shoot authorities shoot them! There are less foxes since the ban, there are also less hares. 5 yearsago we counted 24 from one vantage point on our ride, this year we didn't see any (we are in Harrier country, not foxhound). When will antis realise that banning hunting has not helped the fox one bit! Hunting with hounds is a much more natural method of control

At 08:23:40 on 30.04.10, Flicka wrote:
Yes sorry Jess, you've got that wrong. What Angelalain says is quite true-in areas where they breed pheasants for shooting you will find very few foxes because they have shot them to stop them killing the pheasants. Ironically the biggest fox populations you will find(apart from in towns now!) are probably in foxhunting areas. Ok Jess I know you don't believe foxes should be killed at all but as they are-which do you think is the most humane method? By a predator (the hound), the gun, snare, gassing or poisoning?