Tally-Ho
Way back when I was a horse crazy teen-ager, I had the opportunity to work in a hose show barn that also housed a fox hunt. Before you of you libs pipe up, I was the one doing the "work that Americans won't do" - i.e. I shoveled horse manure and built fences and basically did manual labor in order to pay for my horses board and for my lessons. Because I worked with the hounds and braided and generally helped the Master of Hounds, I was allowed to ride with the hunt. We did not purposly do live hunts - we were too suburban of an area (Chicago area), but every now and then, the hounds actually DID scare up a fox or two. Because of that past history, I have followed the story of the British foxhunting ban for some time. That is one reason why I found this story to be of interest.
"Last week, The Independent was invited to follow a typical hunt in a remote corner of Wales. It killed nine foxes, almost all by illegal methods; the previous week's bag had been 13.
On that evidence, the Hunting Act is failing. Supporters of field sports believe it to be unenforcable, poorly drafted, and riddled with loopholes. Opponents say it is being ignored by many of Britain's 300-odd hunts on a daily basis." (emphasis mine)
That is the crux of the matter. Poorly written laws are impossible to enforce and this law was the epitome of a poorly written law. Case in point, this quote from the article.
"I rang the police station this morning to say we'd be out," said the Master of Fox Hounds at last week's illegal meeting. "Do you know what they told me? The boy told me to have a nice day. In Welsh, of course.
"We've spoken to the Chief Constable and he told us that his officers must govern with the consent of the people. Out here, that means he'll divert no resources to the hunting ban, unless we take the piss."
Here, we have a law, that the people don't want that the police won't enforce. This bad law was passed because someone thought that this method of pest control - and in this part of the world foxes ARE pests - was cruel. I have argued (many, many times) with animal rights folks that overpopulation and starvation are crueler than culling the herb via a hunt. Starvation is the cruelest form of animal abuse on the face of the earth. An animal that is starving will literally be eaten alive by his own metabolism's drive for nourishment. Muscle tissue is broken down in order to keep the heart and the lungs and the brain functioning. It goes on until the animal can no longer stand. From there, it does not take long. If the predators don't (mercifully) get the animal first, the animal's system just slowly shuts down. Controlled hunting - deer hunting, goose hunting, fox hunting, pheasant hunting et al are means of mantaining a healthy vibrant population.
Poorly written laws, such as this one, don't serve the people. It is imperative that we hold our legislators accountable to do it right the first time. Otherwise we end up with horrible laws, like our new transportation amendment.
"Last week, The Independent was invited to follow a typical hunt in a remote corner of Wales. It killed nine foxes, almost all by illegal methods; the previous week's bag had been 13.
On that evidence, the Hunting Act is failing. Supporters of field sports believe it to be unenforcable, poorly drafted, and riddled with loopholes. Opponents say it is being ignored by many of Britain's 300-odd hunts on a daily basis." (emphasis mine)
That is the crux of the matter. Poorly written laws are impossible to enforce and this law was the epitome of a poorly written law. Case in point, this quote from the article.
"I rang the police station this morning to say we'd be out," said the Master of Fox Hounds at last week's illegal meeting. "Do you know what they told me? The boy told me to have a nice day. In Welsh, of course.
"We've spoken to the Chief Constable and he told us that his officers must govern with the consent of the people. Out here, that means he'll divert no resources to the hunting ban, unless we take the piss."
Here, we have a law, that the people don't want that the police won't enforce. This bad law was passed because someone thought that this method of pest control - and in this part of the world foxes ARE pests - was cruel. I have argued (many, many times) with animal rights folks that overpopulation and starvation are crueler than culling the herb via a hunt. Starvation is the cruelest form of animal abuse on the face of the earth. An animal that is starving will literally be eaten alive by his own metabolism's drive for nourishment. Muscle tissue is broken down in order to keep the heart and the lungs and the brain functioning. It goes on until the animal can no longer stand. From there, it does not take long. If the predators don't (mercifully) get the animal first, the animal's system just slowly shuts down. Controlled hunting - deer hunting, goose hunting, fox hunting, pheasant hunting et al are means of mantaining a healthy vibrant population.
Poorly written laws, such as this one, don't serve the people. It is imperative that we hold our legislators accountable to do it right the first time. Otherwise we end up with horrible laws, like our new transportation amendment.
posted by The Lady Logician at
8:26 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home