Fox Hunting - Where's the logic?

Logic and reasoning applied in the absence of relevant facts can generate some strange conclusions.When a former member of the BNP recently lectured me on fox hunting this perverse thought process was demonstrated to the extreme. His rational was as follows:- 1. Foxes are pests. 2. Fox populations should be controlled and can be controlled. 3. Foxes are best controlled by hunting on horseback and with dogs. 4. Legislating against 3 has the consequences of fox population control that is more painful for the fox. 5. There are no effective measures in to prevent illegal killing of foxes.Let's examine each of these statements empirically. 1. Foxes are Pests Any unwanted and destructive insect or animal that attacks food, crops or livestock etc is a pest. In other words anything that threatens mans food supply is a pest. Rodents are therefore a major pest and have been a blight for mans food supply since man began agriculture. A sole fox can destroy, in one year, 5,000-6,000 ....rodents. Yes rodents and they usually do so because rodents are readily available food source. Foxes are generalists and eat whatever is more easily available. Foxes hunt alone, during the night preferentially for rabbits and rodents (mice, voles, ground squirrels), but also moles, song birds, ducks, quails, partridges, pheasants, eggs, insects (like locusts and beetles, including their larvae), earth worms, but they also eat fruit (in some cases and in some species up to 90 %), cadavers of big hoofed animals (or even their living offspring) and red kangaroos (in Australia), fish, frogs and crayfish in wet areas and garbage in urban areas. Chicken is not prevalent in the foxy diet. That's because chickens are not commonly available. Of course foxes will take the easiest prey first. If a farmer is careless in animal husbandry and makes available a free supply of vulnerable chickens then the fox will be there at night doing what foxes do. However well protected chickens will be of little interest to the fox who has a wide and varied food supply. Rodents are a real pest. Rodents multiple quickly and are also active at night. It is fortunate therefore that foxes also hunt at night and can hear the squeak of a mouse from a distance of 100 metres. It seems to me that if we could and did exterminate all foxes we'd have a serious rodent problem. Let's keep the foxes please. They are useful to mankind by controlling pests (rats and mice). Just don't make chickens the easiest source of food for Mr Fox.There's plenty of scientific evidence to support all of the above. If you want references just leave a comment and I'll mark up. 2. Foxes population should and can be controlled. This is a similar argument as badgers. Can populations of these species really be controlled. Well you can exterminate the fox if sufficient energy was expended on the objective in the same way the bear and the wolf were exterminated. That would probably need the whole of the British army on the case for 5 years of more. It would not be easy. Research has shown that:-

• Hunting (Before it was banned) killed around 20,000 foxes a year which represents only 3% of the UK fox population.
• The fox population is governed by the year round availability of food in defended territories.
• Where foxes are persecuted by humans more cubs are produced to restore their population levels.
• Studies in Europe have shown that fox populations can survive losses of up to 70% and still recover fully in the following year.
• Where foxes are killed this merely created a vacant territory which will be quickly filled by other foxes.

So attempting to control foxes is a waste of effort. Surely there is something more useful ex-fox hunter can do more useful things with their time? 3.Foxes are best controlled for the pleasure of sport on horseback. Well if you own a horse and enjoy the chase then this must be true. But it's not a statement of fact is it. It not even an empirical statement. It's an opinion and logical analysis on this point would need to trawl through the concepts about the arrogance of man. Man the spiciest - worse than racist. "Other creatures only exist so that we can eat them." Its the "God put them here for our benefit" belief that has no logical basis. Let's move on. 4. Legislating against 3 will result in more painful methods of fox control. Chasing foxes on horseback is assumed to be a method of control. It could be that it was a sport for pure pleasure. Given that one in three hunts were unsuccessful in catching the fox but still a good time was had by all in the thrill of the chase. I was informed by the former BNP member that farmers now use rat poison to kill foxes because they are unable to hunt them.Alternatively they will shot at them, wounding them in the process. Both result in painful deaths for the fox.Lets ignore the pleasure the Foxes use to get from being chased by people on horses and a pack of hounds. Before hunting with horses and hounds was banned, did all farmers refrain from shooting and poisoning foxes?Do they shoot and poison foxes more since the change in law. Well we've no evidence of the increase in fox control through shooting and poisoning butwhat is clear is that hunting with horses and dogs was not an effective primary control. Let us assume that there are law abiding farmers and farmers who ignore the law (believing that they are unlikely to be caught and punished).And there are farmers who are law abiding.Given that it is illegal to poison foxes and that some farmers are not law abiding (in any large population there will be an element), have the non-law abiding farmers have stepped up their poisoning activities since fox hunting with dogs was banned?And is any increase in this illegal activity (should there have been any increase) a justification for not having the ban? It's like reasoning that we should not outlaw teenage prostitution or else the sex fiends will rape your daughters. e.g. "Let the bad men carry on doing there bad deeds or else if we try to stop them they will do worse. "Such a rationale is not a sound basis for determining legislation. 5. There are no effective measures to catch the bad men (e.g. farmers poisoning foxes). Good news. This one is the simplest of misconceptions. There are very specific rules and regulations about how poison is used. Putting it in a dog bowl just outside the hen house for example and claiming it is to control rats is against the regulations and motive (it was for the rats m'lord) is no defence. A considerable number of Red Kites die as a direct result of ingesting pesticides and other poisonous substances intentionally applied in lethal doses to meat baits (abuse). These highly illegal baits, aimed at foxes, badgers or crows, also cause the deaths of many other animals including kites, other protected birds and even farm dogs. It's a pity the BNP did not do something useful like campaign against lawless farmers. Yes it's true that I am happy that toffs no longer get to enjoy hunting animals on horseback for their pleasure. I would like all such toffs to be re-educated. They are invariably the same toffs who drive 4x4 and try to intimidate drivers of small vehicles with their oversize monsters on the road. These are the same toffs that vote Tory and would like their taxes reduced and the unemployed sent to work houses. The same toffs who who dream of the two tier society of yesteryear with maid servants who they would take delight in seducing and then sending off to the mental hospital when they became pregnant. The same toffs whose bar room political reasoning follows the bigoted sequence of statements at the top of this page.