The real countryside pests are two-legged... (Foxhunting - is this sport?)

Member Name: BizzyB

Product:	Foxhunting - is this sport?
Date:	29/08/01 (387 review reads)
Rating:

Advantages: The history provides an interesting sociological study

Disadvantages: Not the best way to control foxes, Has been overtaken by those with different agendas

I thought long and hard before writing here. I rarely venture into the forum debates but as the sports guide I have the great honour of reading all the opinions that come through this category. The foxhunting debate has become one of the hot topics and raises many emotions on all sides. So why did I feel wary of coming here?

Well firstly it is such an emotive issue, and one where the often stiff medium of words on screen don't do it justice. Secondly and following on from the emotional stance I studied the sociology of sport and read many of the historical studies on fox hunting. Add to this the fact I from a farming background and I can swing from the emotional to the boring, farty academic stance in the blink of the eye which makes me think this could be one seriously disjointed opinion.

Well lets just see where it takes us.

Firstly shall get the crux of the matter out of the way. Do I approve of fox hunting. Simple answer 'No'. From a personal viewpoint it a pastime from which I could derive no personal pleasure from , indeed I would find it quite a stomach churning event.

From a sociological viewpoint fox-hunting provided an interesting case study for the formulation of the Figurational school of Sociology by Norbert Elias. We are now going to have a whirlwind lesson in his teachings.

Elias put forward a model which is often referred to as the Civilizing Process. Now throw all definitions of the word Civilized you may have out of the window. Elias did not use the word in that value-judgment way we do in everyday language. The Civilizing Process is a term used to describe how society has developed through history and looks at the changing norms or behaviour for instance, the development of table manners. Some vital areas to consider here are the fact that with the development of industry and changing patterns and specialization of work people have increased leisure time but a certain amount of p
ressure has been taken from life, with certain aspects of life becoming increasingly mundane. Elias has proposed that sport and leisure is one way in which we can feel pleasurable tension-excitement to balance the boredom of life. Another key aspect has been the increasing taboo against violence and bloodshed. Now here is where I am afraid of coming unstuck because fox-hunting is such an emotive issue but it cannot be denied that its history and development like all leisure activities is a pointer to society in both the context of those who have/do hunt and those who oppose it. In this part I'm afraid I slip my sociology hat on and try my hardest to practice that great tool - detachment.

In it's development fox-hunting can clearly be seen to provide people with a level of pleasurable tension-excitement - the thrill of the hunt, the thrill of the chase. What we see from fox-hunting in a change from hunting for food is that it is the anticipation of the event that gives the pleasure as opposed to the climax. In history as that repugnance towards bloodshed increased hunting moved on from being hands-on and with the introduction of hounds we see the introduction of killing by proxy.

Now before you start shouting at me about describing fox-hunting as a pleasurable form of tension-excitement consider this. We are looking at history. You cannot denigrate those of the past because of your accident of birth today and this is why Elias's study of fox-hunting is difficult to comprehend as we tend to overlay the norms of today onto the past which you cannot do. Elias's study shows the development of fox-hunting and aims to explain why it developed how it did which is back step from the argument of today but an interesting and I believe vital backdrop if we are to understand fully the culture of fox-hunting and the changing norms of society where the majority of people do not find it acceptable.

Of course the argument prevails
as to whether it should be classed as a sport. Herein lies one of the great arguments in sociology as to what actually constitutes sport. Many will argue on these pages that it must have an element of competition and be enjoyable. Well by history and definition this is a rather modern outlook on what we see to have developed as sport and not the true definition. I will not bore you with the ins and outs of the argument now, I could possibly overload dooyoo if I did! Mountaineering is described as sport where the 'competition' is against nature. There is an element of leisure pursuits which can be classed as sport which does not fit the mimetic battle model. However we must accept that fox-hunting is a leisure pursuit in essence and whether we equate with that sport, play or game is beside the way. In the past it was seen as competition against nature, against the fox and it is in later years that we see the development of sport as being predominantly structured by model of games and play that can have a determined end and sense of competition.

I shall not bore you with the sociology of it any longer! But If you did want to read up on Elias's study, and I have done it no justice here but tried, You can read his essay 'An Essay on Sport and Violence' in the book "Quest For Excitement: Sport and Leisure in the Civilizing Process" by Norbert Elias and Eric Dunning (Published by Blackwell ISBN 0-631-19219-0)

I shall swap my sociology hat for my BizzyB baseball cap and make no excuses for being hideously inarticulate and going wildly off subject no doubt.

But your from a farming background, don't you hate foxes?

Well no. They were on the land well before me and have their place in this great ecosystem we so steadily go about usurping.

When my family farmed we did at times get foxes killing livestock, rarely small lambs in the lambing season, more often than not it was the chickens
who were killed. My chickens were beyond free-range. It wouldn't have surprised me if some applied for passports and went to Ibiza if the desire took them. They ravaged the garden, set up nests where they wanted and produced eggs of such high quality you would not believe. When foxes struck the first line of defence was to get the chickens in and strengthen all the hen huts and encourage Mr Foxy to go and find food elsewhere which he did. If a fox become such a problem I would have no qualms in calling in the expertise of a professional gamekeeper if it was deemed that the fox must be shot to safeguard the other animals. I wouldn't enjoy it, I wouldn't relish it, but I could do. I suppose if the family still farmed (having retired over five years ago) today I would probably look towards getting help to relocate foxes having trapped a number of them myself when out trapping feral cats for the Cats Protection league. It is a hypothetical situation and relies heavily on the cooperation of others.

So you wouldn't call in men on horseback and a pack of dogs?

When the argument that foxhunting is a form of pest control arises I give it no more than a sentence as I feel the absurdity speaks for itself. Foxhunting as pest control is like taking a sledgehammer to a walnut. Simply by looking at in the cold light of day it is neither good time management, reliable or environmentally friendly.

Are foxes pests?

I have never liked the description pest for any animal unless it is followed by 'to human beings'. Foxes are not pests and they are not murderers - another phrase I detest being used in relation to any animal. To me it smatters of human beings proportioning human qualities of emotion and behaviour to an animal. Animals don't murder, animals don't kill for pleasure. Animals hunt and kill for food and for practice should they require that natural hunting instinct in the future. Humans have
devised a system for farming food and materials and must work to the bet of their abilities within the environment presented to them taking what they need but not more. Oh I sound such a hippy I know but this is what the experience of sheep farming has taught me.

I can tell you about pests though. In years of farming we had two incidents where we lost a great number of lambs and chickens in the most brutal of fashions.

Firstly, I remember quite clearly the horror of taking a usual stroll into a pasture to visit the new lambs and mother to be to find a number of them dead and others blinded, on closer inspection they had all had their eyes shot out with an air rifle.

Secondly, some kind thinking soul had rescued a huge colony of mink?and released them on our land. The carnage mink can cause is quite unbelievable but I shall not class them as the pest.

No the pest in these scenarios were of the two legged variety, the first was merely sick, the second no doubt good intentioned but misinformed.

Add to this the everyday hardships that haunt farming as well as the chain of crisis and really, foxes are but a drop in the ocean.

So hunting is a great tradition then?

Ah, you have to be careful choosing your adjectives when ever discussing fox-hunting. It is true that the image of the red coated huntsman is an integral part of British history since the 18th century. Taken out of context of the pursuit and it is without doubt a powerful and attractive image. We cannot deny history, or look down on those generations past for holding different dominant values than ourselves. As I said before we are only here by accident of birth and in the future 'great thinkers' will look back on us as being crude, dim and dare I say uncivilized.

Tradition, which I cannot type without hearing Topol sing the song of the same name from Fiddler on the Roof, is not a static set of customs. Indeed the whole th
ing of tradition is the fact it can morph down the generations. The tradition of the hunt can easily be restructured to maintain that pleasurable tension-excitement (whoops sociological slip there!), the thrill of the chase and reflect the changing norms of today's society.

So instead of chasing foxes?

Scent hunts - long held successfully on the Isle of Man the scent hunt can present the same thrill of the hunt by chasing a trial of scent as dragged by a runner. Not only do we remove the hunting of the fox you can maintain a hunt of varied length, time and difficulty with the added bonus that the organisers can plan the route in advance, the hunters need never know, thereby reducing the often uncalled riding over private land with out permission and the damage this can cause.

But what about the hunting pack, happy for them to be put down?

I'm afraid so. With the introduction of scent hunting a great many hunting dogs would still have a purpose but there is the scenario that some will have to be put to sleep. Hunting dogs cannot be rehomed. They are not sweet, loveable puppies you can sit on Wendy Turner's knee and ask Pet Rescue viewers to phone in. They have been bred to be vicious and as proof I can look no further than a late relative of mine who was a master of the hounds. He introduced a new puppy to the pack one night, woke up to find they'd eaten it by morning. Now these hounds were beyond well looked after and fed before you worry the little mites were starving. Whilst I may not approve of what they were kept for I had the highest regard for how they were kept and treated. They killed that pup because it wasn't one of them, they are bred to pack and bred to hunt.

Human beings, oh so wise and wonderful, seem to have a great fascination with breeding other animals under great scrutiny, which sadly applies to our own species. Dogs and cats who can hardly breathe but look cute. Cows
that buckle under the weight of their stomachs and pigs that can hardly walk. It's those two legged animals looking distinctly like pests again.

Would I like to put a gun to the dogs head. Nope, probably couldn't do it when push came to shove and it would stick in my throat that they are as they are because of us.

And all the people you'll put out of work?

I've seen farmers literally work themselves into the grave. When I was a child (and now I have the Hovis bread tune in my head) farmers could employ larbourers both full time and seasonally. By my teens it was a rare farmer that could afford that luxury. I cannot believe I am quoting Emmerdale but when Jack's adopted son skips school that's oh so true (one of the few things that is Emmerdale mind you). There are plenty of opportunities for rural work given better management not a word a like in conjunction with farming which is a vocation good and proper if you are going to do it right (right being my way naturally!!).

The countryside will not disintegrate, implode or fall to pieces due to the banning of hunting with hounds.

But isn't the argument rural vs town?

Well you would think so wouldn't you? I'm rather sick of the country vs town depiction on the grounds, for want of a better phrase, its pants. Yes a huge amount of people turned out from the countryside on the marches and I for one would have gone if I could have. But it wasn't a march about fox-hunting and those with the true concerns of rural matters are pig sick of it being hijacked as such.

Rural matters, which are far more pressing, include structure of British agriculture, who's weaknesses have been highlighted by the foot and mouth crisis. I have lost count of the farmers I have known who have committed suicide though I know if I did the grime task of listing the names I would have to add to more in the light of the F&M crisis.
>
<br>If it is not the rural vs town dichotomy it's the class war. Oh please go and have it on another battlefield. The class arguments often degenerate into nothing more than comic book stereotypes, at the end of which little is said about fox-hunting.

Toffs on horses, the great unwashed sabs. Please. From snobbery to inverted snobbery, fox-hunting has become a useful backdrop for those with a different agenda.

I'm afraid it sickens me the time that parliament has wasted on the fox-hunting legislation which often becomes little more than the class argument I've noted above.

Rurally, people are dying, business are collapsing, the environment is being damaged. Equally throughout the land be it village or inner city children are abused, hospitals are under funded, schools are without teachers and our elected government is happy to settle old scores under the guise of the fox-hunting debate. Excuse me if my faith just slipped out the door.

So what's my conclusion. Pure and simple I would not fox-hunt but have never the energy or impetus to enter the argument actively as I believe it has been hijacked by those with other motives. I respect that fox-hunting has a place in our history and do not seek to have it wiped from the history books but simply to see it develop and reflect the society of the time.

I continue to believe that foxes must be controlled and that this is best served by the practiced and experienced gamekeeper and farmer, personally by shooting as a last resort. I certainly do not condone the use of harmful traps and poisons which can lead to unnecessarily drawn out deaths and pose a risk to other wildlife. If humane trapping is an option I would personally opt for this but for this we need farmers, gamekeepers and fox charities/bodies to co-operate which I hope we hey will do whilst the other 'concerned parties' are off having a meaningless slanging match.

Summary: