|
|
 | | From: | Robert Seago | | Subject: | Re: Hunting is banned! | | Date: | Fri, 26 Nov 2004 19:20:13 +0000 (GMT) |
|
|
 | In article ,
Oz wrote:
> Robert Seago writes
> >> > Er, it does if you're a majority.
> >> > They just can't get their heads around the idea of democracy, these
> >> > people.
> >> >
> >> So every minority pursuit should be made illegal?
> >
> >The problem is that the majority don't feel they like their property
> >violated by a loud minority.
> I know, protesters rarely stick to land they have permission to be on.
Neither do hunters!
I think it is time I repeated a point I made some time ago.
Some 10 years ago I was approached by someone from the local hunt, who
wanted to hunt in the reserve I look after.
I said that I had no right to give permission, that the policy of my Trust
was to allow the hunt to use the 20 ft wide right of way that a farmer
has, and I gave them contact details for the Trust.
They ignored all of this, combed the reserve way off of our courtesy
paths, let alone the right of way, blocked all of the setts and earths
they could find with straw, and then did there well known rampage around
our private land on that Boxing Day.
I kept away despite having heard that they were coming from the local
grapevine, as I thought we would only get more grief, if there was any
argument.
However the director had his Christmas disturbed as many of our members
were very upset about the situation, and phoned him.
I could mention the similar situation on another reserve some 25 miles
away, and the land of a private landowner who is targetted regularly.
I can tell you absolutely that I always spoke up for hunting, as I still
do for shooting, which I do not do, and fishing which I do. This was
because I do not regard the animal suffering incurred to be any more
significant than other forms of cruelty.
After that incident I lost all respect for the attitude of the hunters.
This disrespect has become more strong of late, because they make such
ridiculous claims about the supposed aspect of fox control, dogs having to
be put down, thousands of jobs going, and even the human rights of
themselves.
As for the point about being able to keep the hunt off of private land I
have not been aware of any successful prosecutions.
--
Regards from Robert Seago : http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/rjseago
|
|
| | From: | Dorian | | Subject: | Re: Hunting is banned! | | Date: | Sat, 27 Nov 2004 20:06:01 GMT |
|
|
| On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 19:20:13 +0000 (GMT), Robert Seago
wrote:
>In article ,
> Oz wrote:
>> Robert Seago writes
>> >> > Er, it does if you're a majority.
>> >> > They just can't get their heads around the idea of democracy, these
>> >> > people.
>> >> >
>> >> So every minority pursuit should be made illegal?
>> >
>> >The problem is that the majority don't feel they like their property
>> >violated by a loud minority.
>
>> I know, protesters rarely stick to land they have permission to be on.
>
>Neither do hunters!
>
>I think it is time I repeated a point I made some time ago.
>
>Some 10 years ago I was approached by someone from the local hunt, who
>wanted to hunt in the reserve I look after.
>
>I said that I had no right to give permission, that the policy of my Trust
>was to allow the hunt to use the 20 ft wide right of way that a farmer
>has, and I gave them contact details for the Trust.
>
>They ignored all of this, combed the reserve way off of our courtesy
>paths, let alone the right of way, blocked all of the setts and earths
>they could find with straw, and then did there well known rampage around
>our private land on that Boxing Day.
>
>I kept away despite having heard that they were coming from the local
>grapevine, as I thought we would only get more grief, if there was any
>argument.
You should have informed the police and or the animal welfare groups
like the league, they could have set up CCTV etc.
>
>However the director had his Christmas disturbed as many of our members
>were very upset about the situation, and phoned him.
>
>I could mention the similar situation on another reserve some 25 miles
>away, and the land of a private landowner who is targetted regularly.
>
>I can tell you absolutely that I always spoke up for hunting, as I still
>do for shooting, which I do not do, and fishing which I do. This was
>because I do not regard the animal suffering incurred to be any more
>significant than other forms of cruelty.
>
>After that incident I lost all respect for the attitude of the hunters.
>This disrespect has become more strong of late, because they make such
>ridiculous claims about the supposed aspect of fox control, dogs having to
>be put down, thousands of jobs going, and even the human rights of
>themselves.
>
>As for the point about being able to keep the hunt off of private land I
>have not been aware of any successful prosecutions.
Then it's about time the issue was dealt with. Where are you?
|
|
|
