Making the news today....

[trigger_andy]

Just now, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

You’re on a hiding to nothing on this one Andy. 
 

It simply cannot be argued, sanely, logically and rationally. 
 

That’s not to say you can’t disagree. Of course you can. 
 

But it’s genuinely a fools errand to try and rationalise any argument in favour. 
 

Give it up.....

 

Go on.....

 

You can do it....

 

??

What point cant be argued? 

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

Just now, trigger_andy said:

What point cant be argued? 

?

 

F*ck off!

 

You know full well....

[The avantgardener]

2 minutes ago, trigger_andy said:

Soooo, it keeps him in a job?  

No, it just adds to it.

[trigger_andy]

Just now, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

?

 

F*ck off!

 

You know full well....

If you mean the pro's and cons of Fox Hunting I agree with you whole heartily. I am 100% against it. 

 

It does not mean I cannot see the local implications of its complete removal. 

[eggsarascal]

7 minutes ago, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

There you have it Egger. 
 

It is illegal to intentionally set out to find and kill a fox with horse & hounds. 
 

Those that seek to support / excuse / deny the illegality presumably have equal disregard for all other laws?

 

Its frankly ridiculous and every body knows it’s ridiculous to keep trotting out the lame pseudo justifications. 
 

The compromise was trail hunting and that has been wholly, undeniably and unequivocally blown out of the water by what has been observed over the years since the laws were changed and is validated, irrefutably, by the recent webinar. 

Of course they have a disregard for all other laws, by the way I'm going to Barnard Castle to watch this years Boxing Day hunt.

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

I was just about to edit that in case a ? didn’t ‘get’ the intended manner of the conversation (as I was sure you would) and your ‘laughy’ reassured me. 
 

No antagonism intended but I’m sure you appreciate that. ??

[trigger_andy]

Just now, The avantgardener said:

No, it just adds to it.

Maybe, or maybe they would not need his services full time where his employers no longer allowed to hunt foxes. 

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

1 minute ago, eggsarascal said:

Of course they have a disregard for all other laws, by the way I'm going to Barnard Castle to watch this years Boxing Day hunt.

Sharp Egger! That made I larf ??

[The avantgardener]

1 minute ago, trigger_andy said:

Maybe, or maybe they would not need his services full time where his employers no longer allowed to hunt foxes. 

He manages a shoot, not a fox hunting group. The fox hunters are not his employer and they don’t own the land.

[MattyF]

I’m nearly a 100% for fox hunting , I like seeing foxes from a distance but I don’t like having my chickens killed and I’ve seen desperate foxes cut themselves to bits going through wire in order to feed themselves and young a fit healthy fox won’t go near humans as it’s more than capable of hunting instead of scavenging and will out run the hounds every day of the week so the apex predator survives he will also keep other foxes out of his area..
Problem with shooting them is you will have a 100 young pretenders going for the spot of the fox you just killed and they will decimate areas until the hierarchy of apex predator is restored to a natural balance.. ask any keeper who has killed a fox and has to spend the next week shooting hundreds more for the ones coming in to take the prime spot next to the pheasant pens.. you need an apex predator not a marks man to wield out the week and keep a healthy population, that’s my argument any way.... I don’t agree with the boarding up of fox dens or digging them out.