As a point of interest; when my dog got mange (he was young and healthy) we found it took a very,very long time to get rid of.

To go completely off topic but remain with foxes. In the case of rabies (a truly frightening disease) studies have shown that randomly exterminating local fox populations can actually spread the disease quicker. This is because the vacuum created by the removal of the population allows outside animals to move in and establish themselves: therefore bringing new disease with them.

That depends on what people consider the actual issue is.

a) A moral one: we should be better than the need to enjoy killing things.

b) The death of the fox is cruel/painful.

c) The fox should be a (at least partly) protected wildlife species.

Carefully worded this could make an interesting poll. The original act falls down because it weak. The pro lobby could also add points!

Please do, as you are confusing the hell out of me.
Personally, all i can see is another bogus argument stating we need to hunt with hounds (note, not with guns), due to disease control, namely mange.
But when you break down the argument, none of its make any logical or consistent sense.
Therefore, just another point to make the 'pro list' artificially longer, the same way the farmers cant shoot argument does.

You and your dog have broken no law. The law is that you have to [B]intentionally[B] go out to kill a wild animal, and also I think you have to have more than one dog.

I am very undecided on the whole control of foxes, so can't say whether I would find shooting, snaring or hunting more or less cruel than one another.

So very true.

Sorry to disagree but badgers are not actually known to cause bovine tuberculosis. There is no proven link at the moment. Yes, badgers do get TB and yes, cattle do get TB - however, no-one yet knows who is infecting who, where it came from and what the cure is.

In my opinion, fox hunting is all about the thrill of the chase, the adrenalin rush of a gallop over countryside on a horse, and the blood lust for a kill at the end of it. Ridden hunts in particular are very rarely about control of foxes.

When a foot pack take to the mountainous areas of the Lakes or the Highlands of Scotland, it is not a jolly day out on the back of a horse. It is a hard slog, usually for many hours, on foot, to track down a particular fox who has been taking lambs from hill farms, who can rarely afford to lose lambs in this way. I can accept this way of hunting (although I don't particularly like it) as it is driven by necessity, not for sport.

There is a lot of talk about farmers here, and actually from my experience (in Northern England and Scotland), many farmers are tenants and it is actually the landowners who allow the hunt over the farmland, and not the farmers themselves. If any of the shepherds or farmers I know wanted a problem fox (who was taking lambs) killed, they would contact a local pest control person with a rifle, who would come out and kill the particular fox. Again, not something I like, but I can understand it.

And this opinion from a hill shepherd's wife

The connection with hunting was raised by somebody else, I responded, you picked up on it. In any case, hunting rids of unhealthy Foxes, there a connection!

I never said cause Kirsty, I said spread, and they do.

Please do, Id love proof as every other human being would.

i havent read all of the post on this thread, it is way too long. but i did read the first 5 or 6 pages and all the ones posted recently.

i am strongly against fox hunting. i think it is totally sick and cruel. i dont think the ban is working like it should be, but i really think harsh punishments should be given to those who break the ban. they should properly enforce it. i cant believe some people here actually support it... chasing and then ripping a fox apart... wow... what fun!

that says it all for me dawn... it really does...

good????!!