Arguments Against Hunting
Fox hunting is a delicate issue that often inspires heated debate from both sides of the argument. On the one hand you have the pro hunters insisting that hunting is part of traditional rural life, and that the foxes would undoubtedly die anyway. On the other hand, the anti-hunting protesters have argued for decades about the inhumane conditions encountered by foxes and other hunted animals before they actually die, and that there is no such thing as the 'clean' kill that the pro hunters use to promote their claims. Please note that some of our arguments against fox hunting in the UK are slightly out-of-date now that hunting with dogs has been banned.

"It's wrong to kill animals"

For most people, this is a no-brainer. Although those in favour of hunting insist that foxes are destroying the countryside and slaughtering innocent sheep and lambs, there isn't any reason to hunt them down and destroy them. In actual fact, foxes are the natural predators of some forms of vermin (like rats), and without them, the countryside would be overrun. The number of sheep and lambs that they kill is not that many. They often shy away from taking on live sheep, as they can actually come off worse!

If foxes were posing a definite threat to livestock, it would be more humane to let farmers shoot them instead. There is no real logic to chasing the foxes for hours, as the foxes are not necessarily caught by the time the hunt ends. Hunters often argue that animals can be killed by their natural predators anyway, but very few wild animals would chase down its prey for several hours - they would get bored long before they ever caught their intended food source.

"Hunting is disruptive to rural life"

Hunters often argue that hunting is a traditional part of life in the countryside. This may be true, but that doesn't necessarily make it a good thing. Once a chase has begun, the hunters want to run the fox ragged until it dies from exhaustion or is ripped to shreds by the dogs. This usually means following hot on the heels of the fox at all times -even if this means running riot through rural villages or private property.

In this sense, hunting is actually disruptive to the countryside, as it can result in substantial damage to the local area. Any unfortunate sheep, rabbits or pets that are in the wrong place at the wrong time will inevitably be trampled on, causing further distress.

"The hounds are mistreated"

It's not just the foxes who suffer. Most hounds are killed some time before they reach old age - usually as soon as they cease to run as fast as the hunters want them to. Hunters often suggest breeding large numbers of puppies to see which are the quickest and most agile. Sadly, those that don't make the grade are disposed of. Those that make it through the selection process are often in lots of danger during the hunts themselves. They can become involved in accidents on the roads and rail tracks, as well as coming into contact with electric fences.

Arguments against hunting were narrowly backed by the House of Commons and opposed by the House of Lords. In 2004, the Hunting Bill was re-introduced. Although it was initially rejected by the House of Lords, the rarely used Parliament Act was brought into play to push it through as government legislation. The end result was the 2004 Hunting Act, which banned fox hunting with dogs from February 2005.