Skip to content

On the trail hunting for supporters of trail hunting – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,862
edited 8:06AM in General
On the trail hunting for supporters of trail hunting – politicalbetting.com

Britons support a ban on trail hunting by 50% to 29%Support by 2024 voteGreen: 64%Labour: 62%Lib Dem: 50% (net +22)Reform UK: 45% (net +5)Con: 34% (net -13)yougov.co.uk/politics/art…

Read the full story here

«13

Comments

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 76,713
    With fox hunting, at least they could see a benefit to a load of dogs and horses trampling all over the place. What's the benefit of trail or drag hunting?
  • DoctorGDoctorG Posts: 367
    ydoethur said:

    With fox hunting, at least they could see a benefit to a load of dogs and horses trampling all over the place. What's the benefit of trail or drag hunting?

    Its a hunting version of clay pigeon shooting, no real fox is used.

    Wonder what the yougov definition of someome who lives rurally is
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 58,931
    Did the pollster actually discuss what “trail hunting” means?

    Labour just hate the red jackets, and will oppose whatever they want to do on Boxing Day.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 34,445
    edited 8:15AM
    Digital ID cards tied to a database of all social media posts would solve the Egyptian activist, dodgy paper candidate, and trail hunt problems so the sooner we hand over a big wodge of cash and all our freedom to Palantir, the better.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 63,361
    noneoftheabove said:

    I don't really care, know or have a view either way. But haven't Starmer et al got better things for the government to spend their time on? If not, just call a GE now.

    What could be better than ignoring the tricky problem of the economy and throwing sweeties to the infants on the backbenches so they can enjoy a sugar rush?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 125,403
    Sandpit said:

    Did the pollster actually discuss what “trail hunting” means?

    Labour just hate the red jackets, and will oppose whatever they want to do on Boxing Day.

    Yes, look at the graphic.

    "Trail hunting" is the practice of laying a scent trail using a rag soaked in animal scent for hounds and riders on horseback to chase. Advocates say that this allows people to simulate hunts without actually harming an animal, but critics say it is sometimes used as a smokescreen for actual fox hunting. Do you think trail hunting should be made illegal, or should it remain legal?
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 9,601
    Drag hunting uses artificial scents (like aniseed) on a pre-planned route, focusing on equestrian sport and jumping, while trail hunting uses animal-based scents (like fox urine) and mimics traditional hunting.

    Drag hunting is a more controlled, legitimate equestrian activity distinct from the controversial trail hunting often used as a cover for illegal hunting.

    So to answer your question:
    The benefit of drag hunting is a harmless equestrian sport providing exercise and the other benefits of taking part in a sport.
    The "benefit" of trail hunting is providing a cover for illegal hunting.



  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 76,713
    DoctorG said:

    ydoethur said:

    With fox hunting, at least they could see a benefit to a load of dogs and horses trampling all over the place. What's the benefit of trail or drag hunting?

    Its a hunting version of clay pigeon shooting, no real fox is used.

    Wonder what the yougov definition of someome who lives rurally is
    I know what it is. I'm just pointing out that it essentially means a load of people running around on horseback with dogs in tow for no good reason.

    Arguably, the approval figures would have been higher if they'd said 'and they kill lots of those annoying foxes on the quiet.'
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 21,085
    Sandpit said:

    Did the pollster actually discuss what “trail hunting” means?

    Labour just hate the red jackets, and will oppose whatever they want to do on Boxing Day.

    Assuming that the questions in the skeets are the ones that YouGov gave to their polees, then yes. In disliking the red jacket crew, Labour do seem to have their finger on the national pulse. Most of us want to ban anything that other people do; the only question is who those "other people" are.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 17,759
    Interesting that Reform voters are less supportive of trail hunting than Conservatives.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 125,403
    If I became the country's first directly elected dictator I would introduce chav hunting with hounds.

    Everyone wins.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 17,759
    Sandpit said:

    Did the pollster actually discuss what “trail hunting” means?

    The definition given is in the post quoted in the article.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 33,855
    Barnesian said:

    Drag hunting uses artificial scents (like aniseed) on a pre-planned route, focusing on equestrian sport and jumping, while trail hunting uses animal-based scents (like fox urine) and mimics traditional hunting.

    Drag hunting is a more controlled, legitimate equestrian activity distinct from the controversial trail hunting often used as a cover for illegal hunting.

    So to answer your question:
    The benefit of drag hunting is a harmless equestrian sport providing exercise and the other benefits of taking part in a sport.
    The "benefit" of trail hunting is providing a cover for illegal hunting.



    Thanks for that. I live in a very rural area and I didn't know the distinction between the two. Is the proposal to ban both drag and trail or just trail?

    Personally I support the ban on fox hunting. I would also support a ban on trail.hunting as you have explained it. I would not support a ban on drag hunting under those definitions.

    I also have to say red coat hunting plays no part at all in the life of my rural community. I have never seen any sign of a hunt in the 17 years I have lived here.

    Shooting in its various forms is however a big part of rural life round here
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 24,077
    bondegezou said:

    Interesting that Reform voters are less supportive of trail hunting than Conservatives.

    Not too many participants in Hartlepool.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 56,984
    Morris_Dancer said:

    noneoftheabove said:

    I don't really care, know or have a view either way. But haven't Starmer et al got better things for the government to spend their time on? If not, just call a GE now.

    What could be better than ignoring the tricky problem of the economy and throwing sweeties to the infants on the backbenches so they can enjoy a sugar rush?
    But they are eventually going to have to put a vast amount more into dentistry...
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 56,984
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    If I became the country's first directly elected dictator I would introduce chav hunting with hounds.

    Everyone wins.

    Feeding the hounds a diet of Burberry is barbaric...
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 9,601
    edited 8:39AM
    Richard_Tyndall said:

    Barnesian said:

    Drag hunting uses artificial scents (like aniseed) on a pre-planned route, focusing on equestrian sport and jumping, while trail hunting uses animal-based scents (like fox urine) and mimics traditional hunting.

    Drag hunting is a more controlled, legitimate equestrian activity distinct from the controversial trail hunting often used as a cover for illegal hunting.

    So to answer your question:
    The benefit of drag hunting is a harmless equestrian sport providing exercise and the other benefits of taking part in a sport.
    The "benefit" of trail hunting is providing a cover for illegal hunting.



    Thanks for that. I live in a very rural area and I didn't know the distinction between the two. Is the proposal to ban both drag and trail or just trail?

    Personally I support the ban on fox hunting. I would also support a ban on trail.hunting as you have explained it. I would not support a ban on drag hunting under those definitions.

    I also have to say red coat hunting plays no part at all in the life of my rural community. I have never seen any sign of a hunt in the 17 years I have lived here.

    Shooting in its various forms is however a big part of rural life round here
    The recent proposal in the UK government's Animal Welfare Strategy focuses specifically on banning trail hunting, not drag hunting.

    I have to confess that I didn't know of the distinction between drag and trail hunting 30 minutes ago. You live and learn!

    PS Useful for pub quizzes.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 125,403
    MarqueeMark said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    If I became the country's first directly elected dictator I would introduce chav hunting with hounds.

    Everyone wins.

    Feeding the hounds a diet of Burberry is barbaric...
    Fake Burberry.

    Genuine Burberry the foxes would love.
  • TazTaz Posts: 23,438
    MarqueeMark said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    If I became the country's first directly elected dictator I would introduce chav hunting with hounds.

    Everyone wins.

    Feeding the hounds a diet of Burberry is barbaric...
    As worn by all good football hooligans and wrestling superstar MJF.

    Still, it’s a step up,from Stone Island.
  • TazTaz Posts: 23,438
    Stuartinromford said:

    bondegezou said:

    Interesting that Reform voters are less supportive of trail hunting than Conservatives.

    Suspect it's a manifestation of the gap between Reform's leadership and voting base. The first gives off strong vibes of wanting to be accepted by the old elite, the second really resents the old elite and would probably be happy to hunt them with dogs.
    I agree and I don’t thinks it’s surprising or interesting in the least. I’d be surprised if,it was the other way.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 24,077
    Reflecting on the dodgy Egyptian bloke and his UK citizenship, I remember the Daily Mail taking a more positive position when it came to getting Zola Budd a passport and a Team GB running vest back in the day.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 24,077
    People can ride their horses without being accompanied by a pack of dogs.
  • SandraMcSandraMc Posts: 824
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    If I became the country's first directly elected dictator I would introduce chav hunting with hounds.

    Everyone wins.

    Isn't chav fox hunting lamping? There's a lot of it round my way.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 53,668
    ydoethur said:

    With fox hunting, at least they could see a benefit to a load of dogs and horses trampling all over the place. What's the benefit of trail or drag hunting?

    Your core point about the arrogance and destructiveness of the hunts is on point - and partly explains the query raised in the lead - but the difference with trail hunting ought to be that the person setting the trail is rather less likely to slip through someone's garden fence, and run over their flower beds and vegetable patch, than is an actual fox. So you'd expect a trail hunt to be way less destructive - assuming of course that it doesn't 'accidentally' decide to chase a fox instead.
  • DopermeanDopermean Posts: 2,065
    Given that they could use aniseed rather than animal scent, it's clearly just a ruse to continue actual fox hunting, do a ban seems justified.
    The actual control measure for fox numbers would seem to be the motor car. We have plenty of foxes in my urban area and they don't cause an issue if you secure your bins properly. Given I've seen the cubs being taught to raid bins while surrounded by grazing rabbits, I doubt they can be bothered with chickens either.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,824
    New twitter thread from Jenrick going after the sister:

    https://x.com/robertjenrick/status/2005924943851139440
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 53,668
    bondegezou said:

    Interesting that Reform voters are less supportive of trail hunting than Conservatives.

    The difference between Farage's personal politics and those of his constituents, made real. The same finding would arise in relation to a whole stack of economic policy issues.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 46,135
    edited 9:11AM
    SandyRentool said:

    People can ride their horses without being accompanied by a pack of dogs.

    No foxhounds means one less species for those people to mistreat. Then it would be the poor old horses getting the full brunt of their sadism.

    https://x.com/ImKhan70/status/1875548002900963753?s=20

    https://x.com/garytwisted2/status/2004919128759697746?s=20
  • TresTres Posts: 3,335
    williamglenn said:

    New twitter thread from Jenrick going after the sister:

    https://x.com/robertjenrick/status/2005924943851139440

    I'm old enough to remember when Jenrick was all against social media policing.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 33,855
    Dopermean said:

    Given that they could use aniseed rather than animal scent, it's clearly just a ruse to continue actual fox hunting, do a ban seems justified.
    The actual control measure for fox numbers would seem to be the motor car. We have plenty of foxes in my urban area and they don't cause an issue if you secure your bins properly. Given I've seen the cubs being taught to raid bins while surrounded by grazing rabbits, I doubt they can be bothered with chickens either.

    Sadly you would be wrong on that. We have to have our chickens heavily protected with wire mesh. Foxes and Buzzards are an equal problem.

    That said, it is still no excuse for killing either of the predators. It just needs more thought and attention given to protection of the chickens.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 34,445
    williamglenn said:

    New twitter thread from Jenrick going after the sister:

    https://x.com/robertjenrick/status/2005924943851139440

    Hand gliding sounds like one of those sites needing age-verification.

    Is Jenrick's search history illegal btw? Are we allowed to google terrorists?

    For blue-on-blue fans, his 2012 picture of the sister with David Lammy includes James Cleverly's name quite prominently. Lammy is not Jenrick's rival for the Tory leadership!
  • stodgestodge Posts: 15,774
    Morning all :)

    When the fox hunting ban was proposed, the Countryside Alliance mobilised a huge protest including at racemeetings I attended where they were, to be blunt, aggressive in demanding support for opposing the ban but of course the ban happened and it seemed the world didn't end.

    I've no issue with trail hunting except that it appears (I've no proof) to have been used as bait for actual killing of foxes by hounds (poor choice of words).

    The disconnect between town and country is obvious but there's also a disconnect within rural communities too, it would seem and it may be there's pressure within communities not to be seen to be too vocally opposed to hunting with hounds - I don't know.

    Is it a hill anyone would choose on which to die? Not a fox, I'd presume and I see a lot of foxes here in East London who live well off the gastronomic detritus of modern society (and they are incredibly adept at, for example, getting cold fried chicken leftovers out of the box. I'm not sure a group of hounds trying to work their way round East Ham would be anything more than a nuisance but the control of urban foxes is an issue too.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 84,778
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    If I became the country's first directly elected dictator I would introduce chav hunting with hounds.

    Everyone wins.

    It already (sort of) exists.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunting_the_clean_boot
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 33,855
    Barnesian said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    Barnesian said:

    Drag hunting uses artificial scents (like aniseed) on a pre-planned route, focusing on equestrian sport and jumping, while trail hunting uses animal-based scents (like fox urine) and mimics traditional hunting.

    Drag hunting is a more controlled, legitimate equestrian activity distinct from the controversial trail hunting often used as a cover for illegal hunting.

    So to answer your question:
    The benefit of drag hunting is a harmless equestrian sport providing exercise and the other benefits of taking part in a sport.
    The "benefit" of trail hunting is providing a cover for illegal hunting.



    Thanks for that. I live in a very rural area and I didn't know the distinction between the two. Is the proposal to ban both drag and trail or just trail?

    Personally I support the ban on fox hunting. I would also support a ban on trail.hunting as you have explained it. I would not support a ban on drag hunting under those definitions.

    I also have to say red coat hunting plays no part at all in the life of my rural community. I have never seen any sign of a hunt in the 17 years I have lived here.

    Shooting in its various forms is however a big part of rural life round here
    The recent proposal in the UK government's Animal Welfare Strategy focuses specifically on banning trail hunting, not drag hunting.

    I have to confess that I didn't know of the distinction between drag and trail hunting 30 minutes ago. You live and learn!

    PS Useful for pub quizzes.
    Cheers sir. Seems sensible to me, if perhaps difficult to enforce in practice.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 64,903
    Findings are not a surprise. Opinion about this is almost entirely sentimental now and foxes are put in the same category as dogs and cats by a cosseted and pet obsessed nation. Very few know much about the realities of nature or land management.

    More widely, there seems to be an increasing acceptance of people's dogs being admitted to hotels, museums, pubs and visitor attractions as well - which irritates me - but some battles you just aren't going to win.
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 4,534
    I'm agnostic on this. I'm not in a rural area and I don't feel any need to stop people I'm not naturallly in sympathy with doing things they like. Also I'm ignorant of the true pros & cons (although less so than before I read the comments so far).

    Good morning, everyone.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 132,399
    edited 9:29AM
    So a plurality of Tory supporters oppose a trail hunting ban and less than half of Reform voters want to ban it either. The Boxing Day hunt also is a crucial part of village and rural life in areas like where I live. Hundreds turn out on the village green and the pub serves mulled wine as the hunt gathers and for its supporters in rural areas it is a big deal. Even if they have to hunt a trail or drag hunt now not a fox (whose numbers still need to be kept down).

    Labour may try and ban trail hunting as most of its supporters want as it banned fox hunting but with Farage and Badenoch opposed to a trail hunting ban, if Labour lose power at the next general election it will be restored
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 16,141
    ydoethur said:

    With fox hunting, at least they could see a benefit to a load of dogs and horses trampling all over the place. What's the benefit of trail or drag hunting?

    What's the benefit of lacrosse, ludo or chess? Traditional trail hounds have been around for centuries. No horses, no foxes, but just racing dogs around a trail. Dogs seem to like running around after things.

  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 64,903
    ydoethur said:

    With fox hunting, at least they could see a benefit to a load of dogs and horses trampling all over the place. What's the benefit of trail or drag hunting?

    It keeps the hunts, their dogs and their traditions (by and large) intact, allows them to pursue their pastime and enables one of the most beautiful spectacles of the English countryside to continue.

    It was entirely uncontentious until Labour piped up and said they wanted to ban it. Which is unsurprising since it was entirely uncontroversial when the ban was first implemented 20 years ago.

    I can't deny it's brilliant politics though. Their base will love it and it will even potentially rally some votes around them, as debate on it can easily take up parliamentary oxygen for a full year or two, with the emotion on it substituting for reason.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 16,141
    DoctorG said:

    ydoethur said:

    With fox hunting, at least they could see a benefit to a load of dogs and horses trampling all over the place. What's the benefit of trail or drag hunting?

    Its a hunting version of clay pigeon shooting, no real fox is used.

    Wonder what the yougov definition of someome who lives rurally is
    Banning of clay pigeon shooting next? There's always a chance you will hit a real bird.......

  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 64,903
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Sandpit said:

    Did the pollster actually discuss what “trail hunting” means?

    Labour just hate the red jackets, and will oppose whatever they want to do on Boxing Day.

    Yes, look at the graphic.

    "Trail hunting" is the practice of laying a scent trail using a rag soaked in animal scent for hounds and riders on horseback to chase. Advocates say that this allows people to simulate hunts without actually harming an animal, but critics say it is sometimes used as a smokescreen for actual fox hunting. Do you think trail hunting should be made illegal, or should it remain legal?
    I'd argue that's a leading question.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 89,178
    Morning all...back from a month behind the great Chinese firewall, have I missed much?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 64,903
    bondegezou said:

    Interesting that Reform voters are less supportive of trail hunting than Conservatives.

    That doesn't surprise me in the slightest, actually.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 46,135
    Tres said:

    williamglenn said:

    New twitter thread from Jenrick going after the sister:

    https://x.com/robertjenrick/status/2005924943851139440

    I'm old enough to remember when Jenrick was all against social media policing.
    Jenrick is the sort of prick who would be handing out the pitchforks and burning torches and then sits back to see what happens.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 132,399
    bondegezou said:

    Interesting that Reform voters are less supportive of trail hunting than Conservatives.

    Interesting too that LD voters are more supportive of trail hunting than Labour and Green voters. Good to see there are still some genuine liberals around
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 84,778
    HYUFD said:

    So a plurality of Tory supporters oppose a trail hunting ban and less than half of Reform voters want to ban it either. The Boxing Day hunt also is a crucial part of village and rural life in areas like where I live. Hundreds turn out on the village green and the pub serves mulled wine as the hunt gathers and for its supporters in rural areas it is a big deal. Even if they have to hunt a trail or drag hunt now not a fox (whose numbers still need to be kept down).

    Labour may try and ban trail hunting as most of its supporters want as it banned fox hunting but with Farage and Badenoch opposed to a trail hunting ban, if Labour lose power at the next general election it will be restored

    So you're saying the next government, as evidently with this one, will find little of importance to legislate on, too ?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 76,713
    algarkirk said:

    ydoethur said:

    With fox hunting, at least they could see a benefit to a load of dogs and horses trampling all over the place. What's the benefit of trail or drag hunting?

    What's the benefit of lacrosse, ludo or chess? Traditional trail hounds have been around for centuries. No horses, no foxes, but just racing dogs around a trail. Dogs seem to like running around after things.

    I don't think any of those involve riding across crops or gardens, but I could be wrong. There could be some version of lido where you have to run across a vegetable patch on a donkey, I suppose.
  • TresTres Posts: 3,335
    keeping horses is a v inefficient use of land, we should transition to more productive uses
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 64,903
    stodge said:

    Morning all :)

    When the fox hunting ban was proposed, the Countryside Alliance mobilised a huge protest including at racemeetings I attended where they were, to be blunt, aggressive in demanding support for opposing the ban but of course the ban happened and it seemed the world didn't end.

    I've no issue with trail hunting except that it appears (I've no proof) to have been used as bait for actual killing of foxes by hounds (poor choice of words).

    The disconnect between town and country is obvious but there's also a disconnect within rural communities too, it would seem and it may be there's pressure within communities not to be seen to be too vocally opposed to hunting with hounds - I don't know.

    Is it a hill anyone would choose on which to die? Not a fox, I'd presume and I see a lot of foxes here in East London who live well off the gastronomic detritus of modern society (and they are incredibly adept at, for example, getting cold fried chicken leftovers out of the box. I'm not sure a group of hounds trying to work their way round East Ham would be anything more than a nuisance but the control of urban foxes is an issue too.

    So, you're saying the solution is to extend fox hunting to urban areas?

    Tally ho.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 84,778
    Yet another reason, along with the history of previous "security guarantees", to think that the next one will also be worthless.

    If Trump takes at face value Putin’s spurious claim of the Ukrainian drone attack on his residence, what other made-up excuse he would take at face value once Russia decides to break a peace deal and invade again? This may have been the whole point of Putin’s successful psy-op on Trump today, actually.
    https://x.com/yarotrof/status/2005730459443949961
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 132,399
    Richard_Tyndall said:

    Barnesian said:

    Drag hunting uses artificial scents (like aniseed) on a pre-planned route, focusing on equestrian sport and jumping, while trail hunting uses animal-based scents (like fox urine) and mimics traditional hunting.

    Drag hunting is a more controlled, legitimate equestrian activity distinct from the controversial trail hunting often used as a cover for illegal hunting.

    So to answer your question:
    The benefit of drag hunting is a harmless equestrian sport providing exercise and the other benefits of taking part in a sport.
    The "benefit" of trail hunting is providing a cover for illegal hunting.



    Thanks for that. I live in a very rural area and I didn't know the distinction between the two. Is the proposal to ban both drag and trail or just trail?

    Personally I support the ban on fox hunting. I would also support a ban on trail.hunting as you have explained it. I would not support a ban on drag hunting under those definitions.

    I also have to say red coat hunting plays no part at all in the life of my rural community. I have never seen any sign of a hunt in the 17 years I have lived here.

    Shooting in its various forms is however a big part of rural life round here
    Shooting tends to be of pheasants, grouse etc and organised with often wealthy city types paying farmers and landowners to shoot on their land.

    Trail hunts though tend to involve all sections of the rural community
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 53,668
    Richard_Tyndall said:

    Dopermean said:

    Given that they could use aniseed rather than animal scent, it's clearly just a ruse to continue actual fox hunting, do a ban seems justified.
    The actual control measure for fox numbers would seem to be the motor car. We have plenty of foxes in my urban area and they don't cause an issue if you secure your bins properly. Given I've seen the cubs being taught to raid bins while surrounded by grazing rabbits, I doubt they can be bothered with chickens either.

    Sadly you would be wrong on that. We have to have our chickens heavily protected with wire mesh. Foxes and Buzzards are an equal problem.

    That said, it is still no excuse for killing either of the predators. It just needs more thought and attention given to protection of the chickens.
    Perhaps, talking of buzzards, a related question for any PB bird experts - when I'm in the park with the dog, they like to hover over the bank down to the seashore looking for prey - but several times over recent weeks I have seen both crows and seagulls dive-bombing the buzzards to prevent them hunting and drive them away. Surprisingly, the buzzard, despite being larger and presumably better equipped for fighting, doesn't try to fight back but tries to keep on hunting, before eventually giving up and moving somewhere else. At this time of year birds don't have nests to protect, so this behaviour seems odd?
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 12,954
    Interesting polling - I think it backs up the idea that this kind of thing has been fetishised by urban Tories/Reform, while people who actually live in rural areas often oppose it.

    This is certainly the case in my personal experience in the north of England, with farmers upset about their land and equipment being trashed, and others having their pets ripped to shreds in their gardens. And everyone knows that it's cover for illegal activity - sometimes a fox just happens to be picked up. Yeah right.
  • maxhmaxh Posts: 1,870
    edited 9:40AM
    FPT @StillWaters

    ...
    StillWaters said:

    maxh said:

    Can I recommend to you all a thoroughly interesting 45 minute conversation between Polanski and James Medway, one of the economists I respect most: https://pca.st/episode/aa464011-8ea3-4f3f-8903-0cef76bf3481. Even if Polanski is not your cup of tea (and he isn't mine economically), Meadway is both very intelligent and an excellent communicator.

    Two points, a trigger warning and a question:
    1. One of the things I respect most about Meadway is that, almost uniquely amongst left-wing economists, he engages with the reality of the power of the bond markets in the UK, resisting the simplistic 'just borrow more' that Polanski wants to hear.
    2. Meadway laces his conversation about economics with an understanding of the current and likely future impacts of climate change. At a time when it feels like everyone has just stopped talking about this, that's really refreshing.

    The trigger warning: Meadway was economic adviser to McDonnell when he was Shadow Chancellor. If your thinking goes McDonnell=Corbyn=Antisemitism=Evil, maybe spend your scarce 45 mins elsewhere. But if you're interested in a coherent left-wing critique of our economic system it's worth your time.

    The question: particularly for @Luckyguy1983 as I know you have views on this, but also for any right of centre person interested in economics - what do you make of Meadway's arguments (first 10 mins of the podcast) about how the BoE deals with its ownership of government debt?

    I haven’t (and won’t) have a chance to look but people get way to focused on accounting and what that means in terms of the “rules” that the government has set itself.

    It doesn’t matter.

    If the debt exists and needs to be paid back, in which case it is a real liability and should be thought of as such - ie it is a constraint on our ability to borrow additional money and should bear interest (even if you are just moving money to another pocket that can be helpful from a budget control mechanism).

    Alternatively the debt is not “real” in which case the government has effectively printed money and we need to accept that the money supply is higher than it would otherwise be, with a consequent impact on inflation and interest rates.

    That’s it. There are no other alternatives. What we do at the moment is pretend that it is real, whereas in reality it probably isn’t, but ignore it anyway for spending purposes.

    I personally believe that we should treat it as real and should sterilise the debt. The increase in the money supply has inflated the price of real assets (such as housing) and is a big part of the societal pressure that we are under

    I appreciate the reply - I had just arrived at the in-laws yesterday so didn't have time to do anything other than acknowledge it. But if you're about now...

    ... Could you explain what you mean by 'sterilise the debt'?

    Other than that I broadly agree - though I wonder about your assertion that treating the debt as not real and therefore printing money has led to the inflation that we have all experienced in the price of real goods.

    My understanding, which is partial and on which I am happy to be challenged, is that asset prices such as housing haven't inflated noticeably more since the expansion of the money supply than they were doing beforehand. Instead, the spike in inflation that has led to the current societal pressures was primarily as a result of supply chain shocks during COVID and subsequently specific price shocks as a result of Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

    If this view was correct, then we might be more justified in treating the debt as not real, and so gaining the benefit of increased headroom right now, which is very badly needed for the economy.

    I'd be interested in your or others' views.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 15,774
    SandyRentool said:

    Reflecting on the dodgy Egyptian bloke and his UK citizenship, I remember the Daily Mail taking a more positive position when it came to getting Zola Budd a passport and a Team GB running vest back in the day.

    Well, quite and it seems to have stirred up quite a lot of post-Christmas angst.

    If all political debate is simply going to be trawling over everyone's tweets for the past 15 years to seek out contradictions and hypocrisy, we might as well pack up and go home. To imagine everyone has to be so rigidly consistent in their published opinions is to desire an almost North Korean-style conformity which would suffocate argument. Arguably, politics is most interesting when people come up with arguments you don't expect given their previously stated positions.

    The crux, as I see it, is the question of whether we want as citizens people who say and advocate deeply unpleasant things about individuals, communities and other societal groups or do we accept that given they are born or have obtained legal citizenship (and the obligation to act within the law of the land), that citizenship can't be removed even if they transgress the law and are incarcerated - after all, do we remove the citizenship of murderers if they are born in this country? We take their freedom of course but not their national identity.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 34,445
    OT YouTube knows I need to lose several stone so sent me this 2-minute video about a Bristol University study showing how shuffling refectory menu options (not adding or removing any dishes) produced a 30 per cent reduction in carbon footprint.
    https://www.youtube.com/shorts/2jUx8myk6-k

    It is reminiscent of American gerrymandering, or for punters, analysing seeded tournaments, in that it works by ordering options according to customer preferences or their strengths and weaknesses.

    The original Nature paper:-
    Dish swap across a weekly menu can deliver health and sustainability gains
    https://www.nature.com/articles/s43016-025-01218-8
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 132,399
    edited 9:41AM
    DoctorG said:

    ydoethur said:

    With fox hunting, at least they could see a benefit to a load of dogs and horses trampling all over the place. What's the benefit of trail or drag hunting?

    Its a hunting version of clay pigeon shooting, no real fox is used.

    Wonder what the yougov definition of someome who lives rurally is
    It should be someone who lives in a village or hamlet or on a farm or at a push also a small market town of less than 10 000 people
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,824
    Nigelb said:

    Yet another reason, along with the history of previous "security guarantees", to think that the next one will also be worthless.

    If Trump takes at face value Putin’s spurious claim of the Ukrainian drone attack on his residence, what other made-up excuse he would take at face value once Russia decides to break a peace deal and invade again? This may have been the whole point of Putin’s successful psy-op on Trump today, actually.
    https://x.com/yarotrof/status/2005730459443949961

    Modi is being his usual helpful self.

    https://x.com/narendramodi/status/2005899780795535587
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 12,954
    IanB2 said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    Dopermean said:

    Given that they could use aniseed rather than animal scent, it's clearly just a ruse to continue actual fox hunting, do a ban seems justified.
    The actual control measure for fox numbers would seem to be the motor car. We have plenty of foxes in my urban area and they don't cause an issue if you secure your bins properly. Given I've seen the cubs being taught to raid bins while surrounded by grazing rabbits, I doubt they can be bothered with chickens either.

    Sadly you would be wrong on that. We have to have our chickens heavily protected with wire mesh. Foxes and Buzzards are an equal problem.

    That said, it is still no excuse for killing either of the predators. It just needs more thought and attention given to protection of the chickens.
    Perhaps, talking of buzzards, a related question for any PB bird experts - when I'm in the park with the dog, they like to hover over the bank down to the seashore looking for prey - but several times over recent weeks I have seen both crows and seagulls dive-bombing the buzzards to prevent them hunting and drive them away. Surprisingly, the buzzard, despite being larger and presumably better equipped for fighting, doesn't try to fight back but tries to keep on hunting, before eventually giving up and moving somewhere else. At this time of year birds don't have nests to protect, so this behaviour seems odd?
    I think that's always the case - I've seen gulls successfully mob a white-tailed eagle (which is a great way to get a sense of the vast scale of that bird). I guess the benefit-cost ratio of expending energy on fighting them off isn't worth it.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 64,903
    HYUFD said:

    So a plurality of Tory supporters oppose a trail hunting ban and less than half of Reform voters want to ban it either. The Boxing Day hunt also is a crucial part of village and rural life in areas like where I live. Hundreds turn out on the village green and the pub serves mulled wine as the hunt gathers and for its supporters in rural areas it is a big deal. Even if they have to hunt a trail or drag hunt now not a fox (whose numbers still need to be kept down).

    Labour may try and ban trail hunting as most of its supporters want as it banned fox hunting but with Farage and Badenoch opposed to a trail hunting ban, if Labour lose power at the next general election it will be restored

    I doubt it. Cameron failed to do it, even when he had a majority post GE2015. Much to my disappointment.

    Public opinion is just too far over on this one.

    I know Hunts, especially the Hampshire Hunt. They are good people passionate about their horses, their animals, their dogs and the countryside. They take the law very seriously. They come from all walks of life, and most of the stereotypes about them simply aren't true. They are animal lovers themselves.

    It's rare I find myself in a small minority where I simply fundamentally disagree with the majority of my fellow countrymen, and can't understand why they are where they are, but that's where we're at on this one.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 132,399
    edited 9:44AM
    Eabhal said:

    Interesting polling - I think it backs up the idea that this kind of thing has been fetishised by urban Tories/Reform, while people who actually live in rural areas often oppose it.

    This is certainly the case in my personal experience in the north of England, with farmers upset about their land and equipment being trashed, and others having their pets ripped to shreds in their gardens. And everyone knows that it's cover for illegal activity - sometimes a fox just happens to be picked up. Yeah right.

    Still the poll shows more urban voters want a ban on trail
    hunting than rural voters do.

    What about the rabbits and chickens foxes rip apart?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 64,903
    IanB2 said:

    bondegezou said:

    Interesting that Reform voters are less supportive of trail hunting than Conservatives.

    The difference between Farage's personal politics and those of his constituents, made real. The same finding would arise in relation to a whole stack of economic policy issues.
    Farage is essentially a right wing renegade Tory.

    He'd probably have been Monday club in the 80s.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 21,718
    Tres said:

    williamglenn said:

    New twitter thread from Jenrick going after the sister:

    https://x.com/robertjenrick/status/2005924943851139440

    I'm old enough to remember when Jenrick was all against social media policing.
    Wouldn't Reform struggle taking this Egyptian lark too far when there are the testimonies from 28 former Dulwich students that Nigel Farage himself had said Jews should be be gassed accompanied by appropriate SFX?

    If the price of losing our freedom of speech as the Tories and Reform seem to want means ridding the country of Farage then I'm all for it
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 76,713
    Casino_Royale said:

    IanB2 said:

    bondegezou said:

    Interesting that Reform voters are less supportive of trail hunting than Conservatives.

    The difference between Farage's personal politics and those of his constituents, made real. The same finding would arise in relation to a whole stack of economic policy issues.
    Farage is essentially a right wing renegade Tory.

    He'd probably have been Monday club in the 80s.
    They'd probably have kicked him out for being too low class.

    I mean, he was at Dulwich and all.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 36,317
    HYUFD said:

    So a plurality of Tory supporters oppose a trail hunting ban and less than half of Reform voters want to ban it either. The Boxing Day hunt also is a crucial part of village and rural life in areas like where I live. Hundreds turn out on the village green and the pub serves mulled wine as the hunt gathers and for its supporters in rural areas it is a big deal. Even if they have to hunt a trail or drag hunt now not a fox (whose numbers still need to be kept down).

    Labour may try and ban trail hunting as most of its supporters want as it banned fox hunting but with Farage and Badenoch opposed to a trail hunting ban, if Labour lose power at the next general election it will be restored

    Good morning one and all!

    There's a village the other side of the A12 from us where occasionally, apparently, a hunt 'meets' but to the best of my knowledge and belief a hunt hasn't been seen in or near the small market town where I live, in living memory. I never saw any signs of one either when, back in my working life twenty something years ago, I regularly visited the Brentwood area.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 76,713
    edited 9:45AM
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Morning all...back from a month behind the great Chinese firewall, have I missed much?

    Nigel Farage has declared that abusive antisemites should be stripped of British nationality and deported.

    The process to get him back to France is underway.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 132,399
    Nigelb said:

    HYUFD said:

    So a plurality of Tory supporters oppose a trail hunting ban and less than half of Reform voters want to ban it either. The Boxing Day hunt also is a crucial part of village and rural life in areas like where I live. Hundreds turn out on the village green and the pub serves mulled wine as the hunt gathers and for its supporters in rural areas it is a big deal. Even if they have to hunt a trail or drag hunt now not a fox (whose numbers still need to be kept down).

    Labour may try and ban trail hunting as most of its supporters want as it banned fox hunting but with Farage and Badenoch opposed to a trail hunting ban, if Labour lose power at the next general election it will be restored

    So you're saying the next government, as evidently with this one, will find little of importance to legislate on, too ?
    Labour started these hunt bans
  • maxhmaxh Posts: 1,870
    Casino_Royale said:

    Findings are not a surprise. Opinion about this is almost entirely sentimental now and foxes are put in the same category as dogs and cats by a cosseted and pet obsessed nation. Very few know much about the realities of nature or land management.

    More widely, there seems to be an increasing acceptance of people's dogs being admitted to hotels, museums, pubs and visitor attractions as well - which irritates me - but some battles you just aren't going to win.

    I think I agree with this, though like Anne it's not something I feel strongly about.

    A decade ago I would have felt differently but in my view there are far more pressing animal cruelty concerns within our food system than the way a small number of rural pests are treated when they are killed.

    The ban feels like unnecessary class warfare. I vaguely disapprove of people on horseback encouraging a pack of hounds to chase foxes around the countryside and rip them apart, but suspect those same people would vaguely disapprove of me getting out of a plane in midair, so each to their own.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 15,774
    Casino_Royale said:

    stodge said:

    Morning all :)

    When the fox hunting ban was proposed, the Countryside Alliance mobilised a huge protest including at racemeetings I attended where they were, to be blunt, aggressive in demanding support for opposing the ban but of course the ban happened and it seemed the world didn't end.

    I've no issue with trail hunting except that it appears (I've no proof) to have been used as bait for actual killing of foxes by hounds (poor choice of words).

    The disconnect between town and country is obvious but there's also a disconnect within rural communities too, it would seem and it may be there's pressure within communities not to be seen to be too vocally opposed to hunting with hounds - I don't know.

    Is it a hill anyone would choose on which to die? Not a fox, I'd presume and I see a lot of foxes here in East London who live well off the gastronomic detritus of modern society (and they are incredibly adept at, for example, getting cold fried chicken leftovers out of the box. I'm not sure a group of hounds trying to work their way round East Ham would be anything more than a nuisance but the control of urban foxes is an issue too.

    So, you're saying the solution is to extend fox hunting to urban areas?

    Tally ho.
    Morning to you, sir.

    It's a thought for a chill Tuesday morning - I can certainly imagine the Plashet & Wall End Stag Hounds getting plenty of applause as they navigate up the High Street between the buses - as to whether the hounds would be diverted by the smells from the shawarma or fried chicken shops, I'm no expert and you certainly wouldn't want them going into the tube station and trying to get through the barriers - there are plenty trying to do that all the time.

    I also suspect it would be hunting on ebikes rather than horses but again not the worst idea I've ever heard.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 9,601
    algarkirk said:

    ydoethur said:

    With fox hunting, at least they could see a benefit to a load of dogs and horses trampling all over the place. What's the benefit of trail or drag hunting?

    What's the benefit of lacrosse, ludo or chess? Traditional trail hounds have been around for centuries. No horses, no foxes, but just racing dogs around a trail. Dogs seem to like running around after things.

    What's the benefit of any sport? What's the benefit of cricket?

    I can see the benefit of beach volleyball but cricket!!

    I suspect it attracts people on the spectrum who like data but not a lot of disturbing action.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 38,905
    "Asylum seekers should be required to wear electronic tags so their movements can be tracked, a policing chief has proposed.

    Katy Bourne, Sussex’s police and crime commissioner (PCC), said the move would act as a deterrent to any potential criminal activity. It could also give migrants “greater freedom” to travel further from holding centres and help them get temporary jobs."

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/12/30/asylum-seekers-should-be-tagged-says-policing-chief/
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 76,713
    stodge said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    stodge said:

    Morning all :)

    When the fox hunting ban was proposed, the Countryside Alliance mobilised a huge protest including at racemeetings I attended where they were, to be blunt, aggressive in demanding support for opposing the ban but of course the ban happened and it seemed the world didn't end.

    I've no issue with trail hunting except that it appears (I've no proof) to have been used as bait for actual killing of foxes by hounds (poor choice of words).

    The disconnect between town and country is obvious but there's also a disconnect within rural communities too, it would seem and it may be there's pressure within communities not to be seen to be too vocally opposed to hunting with hounds - I don't know.

    Is it a hill anyone would choose on which to die? Not a fox, I'd presume and I see a lot of foxes here in East London who live well off the gastronomic detritus of modern society (and they are incredibly adept at, for example, getting cold fried chicken leftovers out of the box. I'm not sure a group of hounds trying to work their way round East Ham would be anything more than a nuisance but the control of urban foxes is an issue too.

    So, you're saying the solution is to extend fox hunting to urban areas?

    Tally ho.
    Morning to you, sir.

    It's a thought for a chill Tuesday morning - I can certainly imagine the Plashet & Wall End Stag Hounds getting plenty of applause as they navigate up the High Street between the buses - as to whether the hounds would be diverted by the smells from the shawarma or fried chicken shops, I'm no expert and you certainly wouldn't want them going into the tube station and trying to get through the barriers - there are plenty trying to do that all the time.

    I also suspect it would be hunting on ebikes rather than horses but again not the worst idea I've ever heard.
    In the 1930s a group of peers put forward a suggestion for hunting foxes in London. They suggested horses and yellow jackets.

    Can't remember who they were, but they later admitted they were just trolling the government.
  • DoctorGDoctorG Posts: 367
    edited 9:49AM
    Richard_Tyndall said:

    Barnesian said:

    Drag hunting uses artificial scents (like aniseed) on a pre-planned route, focusing on equestrian sport and jumping, while trail hunting uses animal-based scents (like fox urine) and mimics traditional hunting.

    Drag hunting is a more controlled, legitimate equestrian activity distinct from the controversial trail hunting often used as a cover for illegal hunting.

    So to answer your question:
    The benefit of drag hunting is a harmless equestrian sport providing exercise and the other benefits of taking part in a sport.
    The "benefit" of trail hunting is providing a cover for illegal hunting.



    Thanks for that. I live in a very rural area and I didn't know the distinction between the two. Is the proposal to ban both drag and trail or just trail?

    Personally I support the ban on fox hunting. I would also support a ban on trail.hunting as you have explained it. I would not support a ban on drag hunting under those definitions.

    I also have to say red coat hunting plays no part at all in the life of my rural community. I have never seen any sign of a hunt in the 17 years I have lived here.

    Shooting in its various forms is however a big part of rural life round here
    I'm in a rural part of Scotland and fairly sure there is no red coat hunting with hounds or trail, I think it's only really a thing in parts of the Borders and further south, but happy to be corrected.

    As the header says, hunting with hounds was banned in Scotland but I am not sure how big a thing it was even before the ban
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 12,954
    HYUFD said:

    Eabhal said:

    Interesting polling - I think it backs up the idea that this kind of thing has been fetishised by urban Tories/Reform, while people who actually live in rural areas often oppose it.

    This is certainly the case in my personal experience in the north of England, with farmers upset about their land and equipment being trashed, and others having their pets ripped to shreds in their gardens. And everyone knows that it's cover for illegal activity - sometimes a fox just happens to be picked up. Yeah right.

    Still the poll shows more urban voters want a ban on trail
    hunting than rural voters do.

    What about the rabbits and chickens foxes rip apart?
    That's the point I'm making - it's the urban voters who don't actually live there who are more supportive. Labour should put some of the videos up of a farmer's collie getting mauled to death and you'd get a change in opinion.

    Your latter point doesn't work on the basis that people expect a lower tolerance for cruelty and pain from human beings. We all understand that nature is horribly cruel - doesn't mean we need to be.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 76,713
    Barnesian said:

    algarkirk said:

    ydoethur said:

    With fox hunting, at least they could see a benefit to a load of dogs and horses trampling all over the place. What's the benefit of trail or drag hunting?

    What's the benefit of lacrosse, ludo or chess? Traditional trail hounds have been around for centuries. No horses, no foxes, but just racing dogs around a trail. Dogs seem to like running around after things.

    What's the benefit of any sport? What's the benefit of cricket?

    I can see the benefit of beach volleyball but cricket!!

    I suspect it attracts people on the spectrum who like data but not a lot of disturbing action.
    Why beach volleyball? Does it feel harder to you?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 53,668
    Eabhal said:

    IanB2 said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    Dopermean said:

    Given that they could use aniseed rather than animal scent, it's clearly just a ruse to continue actual fox hunting, do a ban seems justified.
    The actual control measure for fox numbers would seem to be the motor car. We have plenty of foxes in my urban area and they don't cause an issue if you secure your bins properly. Given I've seen the cubs being taught to raid bins while surrounded by grazing rabbits, I doubt they can be bothered with chickens either.

    Sadly you would be wrong on that. We have to have our chickens heavily protected with wire mesh. Foxes and Buzzards are an equal problem.

    That said, it is still no excuse for killing either of the predators. It just needs more thought and attention given to protection of the chickens.
    Perhaps, talking of buzzards, a related question for any PB bird experts - when I'm in the park with the dog, they like to hover over the bank down to the seashore looking for prey - but several times over recent weeks I have seen both crows and seagulls dive-bombing the buzzards to prevent them hunting and drive them away. Surprisingly, the buzzard, despite being larger and presumably better equipped for fighting, doesn't try to fight back but tries to keep on hunting, before eventually giving up and moving somewhere else. At this time of year birds don't have nests to protect, so this behaviour seems odd?
    I think that's always the case - I've seen gulls successfully mob a white-tailed eagle (which is a great way to get a sense of the vast scale of that bird). I guess the benefit-cost ratio of expending energy on fighting them off isn't worth it.
    But why are the crows and gulls bothered, in the first place? The buzzard is no threat to them, and neither seagulls or crows go hunting for mice and the like from the air
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 47,254
    HYUFD said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    Barnesian said:

    Drag hunting uses artificial scents (like aniseed) on a pre-planned route, focusing on equestrian sport and jumping, while trail hunting uses animal-based scents (like fox urine) and mimics traditional hunting.

    Drag hunting is a more controlled, legitimate equestrian activity distinct from the controversial trail hunting often used as a cover for illegal hunting.

    So to answer your question:
    The benefit of drag hunting is a harmless equestrian sport providing exercise and the other benefits of taking part in a sport.
    The "benefit" of trail hunting is providing a cover for illegal hunting.



    Thanks for that. I live in a very rural area and I didn't know the distinction between the two. Is the proposal to ban both drag and trail or just trail?

    Personally I support the ban on fox hunting. I would also support a ban on trail.hunting as you have explained it. I would not support a ban on drag hunting under those definitions.

    I also have to say red coat hunting plays no part at all in the life of my rural community. I have never seen any sign of a hunt in the 17 years I have lived here.

    Shooting in its various forms is however a big part of rural life round here
    Shooting tends to be of pheasants, grouse etc and organised with often wealthy city types paying farmers and landowners to shoot on their land.

    Trail hunts though tend to involve all sections of the rural community
    My friend of old, who had a fine flat-coat retriever, would have been surrpised to be called a wealthy city type.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 16,141
    edited 9:49AM
    Tres said:

    keeping horses is a v inefficient use of land, we should transition to more productive uses

    Whether a land use is inefficient is entirely based on your assumptions. For example on one set of assumptions use of land for farming in the UK is highly inefficient because with economies of scale it can be better done elsewhere. The use of land for cathedrals, sports stadiums and the retailing of junk could be regarded as inefficient.

    Personally I would like a nation that does without dogs better than one which did without horses. But I don't think my views will get very far.

  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 12,954
    IanB2 said:

    Eabhal said:

    IanB2 said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    Dopermean said:

    Given that they could use aniseed rather than animal scent, it's clearly just a ruse to continue actual fox hunting, do a ban seems justified.
    The actual control measure for fox numbers would seem to be the motor car. We have plenty of foxes in my urban area and they don't cause an issue if you secure your bins properly. Given I've seen the cubs being taught to raid bins while surrounded by grazing rabbits, I doubt they can be bothered with chickens either.

    Sadly you would be wrong on that. We have to have our chickens heavily protected with wire mesh. Foxes and Buzzards are an equal problem.

    That said, it is still no excuse for killing either of the predators. It just needs more thought and attention given to protection of the chickens.
    Perhaps, talking of buzzards, a related question for any PB bird experts - when I'm in the park with the dog, they like to hover over the bank down to the seashore looking for prey - but several times over recent weeks I have seen both crows and seagulls dive-bombing the buzzards to prevent them hunting and drive them away. Surprisingly, the buzzard, despite being larger and presumably better equipped for fighting, doesn't try to fight back but tries to keep on hunting, before eventually giving up and moving somewhere else. At this time of year birds don't have nests to protect, so this behaviour seems odd?
    I think that's always the case - I've seen gulls successfully mob a white-tailed eagle (which is a great way to get a sense of the vast scale of that bird). I guess the benefit-cost ratio of expending energy on fighting them off isn't worth it.
    But why are the crows and gulls bothered, in the first place? The buzzard is no threat to them, and neither seagulls or crows go hunting for mice and the like from the air
    They would certainly go for their young I would expect.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 44,488
    Bonjour tout le monde.

    No surprise at all with the poll. I think a lot of people would be amazed that people still dress up like idiots and do anything in such an organised way any more. If you say what about bringing back fox hunting they would look at you as though you had suggested we should bring back bear baiting.

    The Hunting Act was a Bad Law. It was spiteful, illogical, not based on science and class envy-driven. As one T Blair accepted. But it helped to shore up the left and brought some of the class warriors and super-lefties back on side.

    Let's now look at the state of the (voting preference) polls. Lab is bumping along the bottom, with My Party and the Greens eating their (quorn-based) lunch. They need something to bring some lefties back into the fold and aiming at the red-coated toffs is as good a way as any. While not such a searing insight, it nevertheless remains probably the most important factor in this Lab committment. We may be full-blown capitalists in everything but name but we still can performatively hate the toffs.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 6,489
    Tres said:

    keeping horses is a v inefficient use of land, we should transition to more productive uses

    What an extraordinarily authoritarian comment. I don’t care for horses but the market can decide perfectly well whether rural land is best use for paddock, crop growing or rewilding.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 53,668
    HYUFD said:

    So a plurality of Tory supporters oppose a trail hunting ban and less than half of Reform voters want to ban it either. The Boxing Day hunt also is a crucial part of village and rural life in areas like where I live. Hundreds turn out on the village green and the pub serves mulled wine as the hunt gathers and for its supporters in rural areas it is a big deal. Even if they have to hunt a trail or drag hunt now not a fox (whose numbers still need to be kept down).

    Labour may try and ban trail hunting as most of its supporters want as it banned fox hunting but with Farage and Badenoch opposed to a trail hunting ban, if Labour lose power at the next general election it will be restored

    Not with those polling numbers in the lead, it won't. No government - and most especially one in the fragile poisition it's likely to be in after the next election - will want to take on the powerful animal welfare lobby and be so dramatically on the wrong side of public opinion, for no electoral or political or financial benefit whatsoever.

  • DoctorGDoctorG Posts: 367
    ydoethur said:

    DoctorG said:

    ydoethur said:

    With fox hunting, at least they could see a benefit to a load of dogs and horses trampling all over the place. What's the benefit of trail or drag hunting?

    Its a hunting version of clay pigeon shooting, no real fox is used.

    Wonder what the yougov definition of someome who lives rurally is
    I know what it is. I'm just pointing out that it essentially means a load of people running around on horseback with dogs in tow for no good reason.

    Arguably, the approval figures would have been higher if they'd said 'and they kill lots of those annoying foxes on the quiet.'
    Aye, I have heard tale of plenty of farms who dont want the hunts on them due to the damage they cause to the land. Dressing up in red coats to ride a horse/hunt on boxing days is not really a thing up here
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 27,166
    Regarding the header article. Just because a thing is unpopular is not enough reason to ban it. IIUC there is no animal cruelty involved, so provided they own the land and pay for their own jackets it's a them problem not a state problem. Authoritarian Starmer bites again.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 12,954
    moonshine said:

    Tres said:

    keeping horses is a v inefficient use of land, we should transition to more productive uses

    What an extraordinarily authoritarian comment. I don’t care for horses but the market can decide perfectly well whether rural land is best use for paddock, crop growing or rewilding.
    So you'd get rid of all farming subsidies?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 64,903
    maxh said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    Findings are not a surprise. Opinion about this is almost entirely sentimental now and foxes are put in the same category as dogs and cats by a cosseted and pet obsessed nation. Very few know much about the realities of nature or land management.

    More widely, there seems to be an increasing acceptance of people's dogs being admitted to hotels, museums, pubs and visitor attractions as well - which irritates me - but some battles you just aren't going to win.

    I think I agree with this, though like Anne it's not something I feel strongly about.

    A decade ago I would have felt differently but in my view there are far more pressing animal cruelty concerns within our food system than the way a small number of rural pests are treated when they are killed.

    The ban feels like unnecessary class warfare. I vaguely disapprove of people on horseback encouraging a pack of hounds to chase foxes around the countryside and rip them apart, but suspect those same people would vaguely disapprove of me getting out of a plane in midair, so each to their own.
    Fair enough.

    Make sure you wear a parachute, if you do that.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 48,613
    edited 9:54AM
    Nigelb said:

    Yet another reason, along with the history of previous "security guarantees", to think that the next one will also be worthless.

    If Trump takes at face value Putin’s spurious claim of the Ukrainian drone attack on his residence, what other made-up excuse he would take at face value once Russia decides to break a peace deal and invade again? This may have been the whole point of Putin’s successful psy-op on Trump today, actually.
    https://x.com/yarotrof/status/2005730459443949961

    This (in addition to the obvious point that Putin wants surrender or to keep fighting) is the biggest obstacle to a peace deal. It requires credible US security guarantees and those are by definition (because of that 'credible' caveat) impossible under Donald Trump.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 44,488
    Casino_Royale said:

    HYUFD said:

    So a plurality of Tory supporters oppose a trail hunting ban and less than half of Reform voters want to ban it either. The Boxing Day hunt also is a crucial part of village and rural life in areas like where I live. Hundreds turn out on the village green and the pub serves mulled wine as the hunt gathers and for its supporters in rural areas it is a big deal. Even if they have to hunt a trail or drag hunt now not a fox (whose numbers still need to be kept down).

    Labour may try and ban trail hunting as most of its supporters want as it banned fox hunting but with Farage and Badenoch opposed to a trail hunting ban, if Labour lose power at the next general election it will be restored

    I doubt it. Cameron failed to do it, even when he had a majority post GE2015. Much to my disappointment.

    Public opinion is just too far over on this one.

    I know Hunts, especially the Hampshire Hunt. They are good people passionate about their horses, their animals, their dogs and the countryside. They take the law very seriously. They come from all walks of life, and most of the stereotypes about them simply aren't true. They are animal lovers themselves.

    It's rare I find myself in a small minority where I simply fundamentally disagree with the majority of my fellow countrymen, and can't understand why they are where they are, but that's where we're at on this one.
    As has always been the way with hunting, 97.4% of the population doesn't really care one way or the other (unless put in a corner and asked). But those that care really care and are vocal about it. It is, as my post above describes, also a call to arms to Lab politicians asking "how Lab are you?" which touches something in a Lab MP deeply.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 34,445
    Miliband plots £13bn solar panel blitz to create ‘zero bill’ properties
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/gift/6cc098e6e585cd5e

    Gift link to bypass paywall.

    Miliband backers should check their betting slips.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 16,141
    Casino_Royale said:

    HYUFD said:

    So a plurality of Tory supporters oppose a trail hunting ban and less than half of Reform voters want to ban it either. The Boxing Day hunt also is a crucial part of village and rural life in areas like where I live. Hundreds turn out on the village green and the pub serves mulled wine as the hunt gathers and for its supporters in rural areas it is a big deal. Even if they have to hunt a trail or drag hunt now not a fox (whose numbers still need to be kept down).

    Labour may try and ban trail hunting as most of its supporters want as it banned fox hunting but with Farage and Badenoch opposed to a trail hunting ban, if Labour lose power at the next general election it will be restored

    I doubt it. Cameron failed to do it, even when he had a majority post GE2015. Much to my disappointment.

    Public opinion is just too far over on this one.

    I know Hunts, especially the Hampshire Hunt. They are good people passionate about their horses, their animals, their dogs and the countryside. They take the law very seriously. They come from all walks of life, and most of the stereotypes about them simply aren't true. They are animal lovers themselves.

    It's rare I find myself in a small minority where I simply fundamentally disagree with the majority of my fellow countrymen, and can't understand why they are where they are, but that's where we're at on this one.
    Spot on.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 6,489
    Theuniondivvie said:

    Tres said:

    williamglenn said:

    New twitter thread from Jenrick going after the sister:

    https://x.com/robertjenrick/status/2005924943851139440

    I'm old enough to remember when Jenrick was all against social media policing.
    Jenrick is the sort of prick who would be handing out the pitchforks and burning torches and then sits back to see what happens.
    Whereas I see Jenrick’s transformation from Boriswave lackey and feel my heart warmed.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 64,903
    DavidL said:

    Yet more squirrel politics. We need some grown up leadership who can focus on things that actually matter.

    I wouldn't mind seeing the polling on hunting grey squirrels back off the mainland.

    Irritating little American bastards, they are.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 53,668
    algarkirk said:

    Tres said:

    keeping horses is a v inefficient use of land, we should transition to more productive uses

    Whether a land use is inefficient is entirely based on your assumptions. For example on one set of assumptions use of land for farming in the UK is highly inefficient because with economies of scale it can be better done elsewhere. The use of land for cathedrals, sports stadiums and the retailing of junk could be regarded as inefficient.

    Personally I would like a nation that does without dogs better than one which did without horses. But I don't think my views will get very far.

    Relatively recent research has pushed back man's domestication of the dog to 20,000 years ago or more, whereas the horse has only been domesticated for 4-5,000 years.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 27,166
    Andy_JS said:

    "Asylum seekers should be required to wear electronic tags so their movements can be tracked, a policing chief has proposed.

    Katy Bourne, Sussex’s police and crime commissioner (PCC), said the move would act as a deterrent to any potential criminal activity. It could also give migrants “greater freedom” to travel further from holding centres and help them get temporary jobs."

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/12/30/asylum-seekers-should-be-tagged-says-policing-chief/

    (makes beep-beep sounds from the tracker in "Aliens")

    Incidentally Andy, regarding your last-thread question of Starmer post-May, there is no mechanism to remove an unpopular Labour leader without his consent, so if Starmer digs in (and he will) they and we are stuck with him.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 48,613
    moonshine said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Tres said:

    williamglenn said:

    New twitter thread from Jenrick going after the sister:

    https://x.com/robertjenrick/status/2005924943851139440

    I'm old enough to remember when Jenrick was all against social media policing.
    Jenrick is the sort of prick who would be handing out the pitchforks and burning torches and then sits back to see what happens.
    Whereas I see Jenrick’s transformation from Boriswave lackey and feel my heart warmed.
    Ah, battling that 'groupthink' again, I see. Indefatigable you are.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 15,774
    HYUFD said:

    So a plurality of Tory supporters oppose a trail hunting ban and less than half of Reform voters want to ban it either. The Boxing Day hunt also is a crucial part of village and rural life in areas like where I live. Hundreds turn out on the village green and the pub serves mulled wine as the hunt gathers and for its supporters in rural areas it is a big deal. Even if they have to hunt a trail or drag hunt now not a fox (whose numbers still need to be kept down).

    Labour may try and ban trail hunting as most of its supporters want as it banned fox hunting but with Farage and Badenoch opposed to a trail hunting ban, if Labour lose power at the next general election it will be restored

    There are perhaps only 170 hunt packs in England so this romanticised notion of every village welcoming its hunt with drinks and applause really needs to be challenged.

    My only experience of this was in St Ives (Cornwall) several years ago when the Western Hunt paid the town a visit and it was all very congenial with a few supporters shouting and a small crowd applauding. For most, it was a curiousity and I suppose if there's a purpose to it, it shows urban people an aspect of rural life with which they would otherwise be unfamiliar.

    I just think rural communities have a lot more serious issues than the future of the local Hunt.
Sign In or Register to comment.

© Vanilla Keystone Theme 2025