The Boxing Day hunt meets brought a great deal of coverage in the regional and national press, so those of us who oppose the minority pastime of tearing wild animals apart with dogs for the pleasure of a few human onlookers were curious as to what the proponents of blood sports would have to say for themselves on this occasion. We were naturally expecting the assorted huntsmen, huntswomen and foot-followers to seize this opportunity to present a compelling and invigorating case for demonising and tormenting our native wildlife, but the reality was a great surprise.
Instead of some strident and uplifting call to arms, or some inspirational, spirited and compelling defence of the practise of pursuing our wildlife up hill and down dale until it’s exhausted, dragged from its hiding place and torn apart by slavering hounds, we heard the same tired sentiments. We heard that the ban was ‘a bad law’, an argument that’s patently failed to convince any undecided voters, but there was also some truly breathtaking nonsense about hounds only catching the old, the diseased and the weak. Leaving aside the question of why anyone outside an asylum for the criminally insane should view the old, the diseased and the weak being ripped apart by dogs as a pleasurable spectator sport, this argument leaves hordes of fit, vigorous and presumably hungry foxes rampaging over the British countryside.
It’s all complete nonsense, of course, and the floundering supporters of blood sports are fully aware of this. Worse still, for them, there have been numerous court cases involving terriermen and their ghastly practise of ‘digging out’, so more and more ‘undecided’ voters are becoming aware of the grim reality of fox hunting, where a small, whippet-like creature that’s regularly seen off by pet cats is pursued by legions of mounted hunt followers, terriermen on quad bikes and packs of hounds bred for stamina. If, by some miracle, this persecuted creature manages to find sanctuary underground in some place that hasn’t been deliberately closed up by the terriermen beforehand, terriers are sent into the dark tunnels to produce a scenario that is almost literally Hell on Earth.
The fox is either part eaten alive by one or more snarling opponents in the damp darkness, or else it’s driven out by terriers or dug out and battered to death with a shovel or more humanely – shot . Another option is for the creature to be ‘bolted’ from its refuge, to meet an agonising death as a whimpering bundle of blood-soaked fur, torn entrails and cracked bones, and torn apart by the baying hounds. While this is a scenario that turns the stomachs of many hunt followers, a lot of these people are saying as much on the various internet forums and social networking groups devoted to supporting fox hunting, and their published comments are not difficult to find.
This minority pastime is described by its followers as a sport, but if this is the case, it’s the only sport I know of where observers can be verbally abused and physically assaulted for having the temerity to try to film it. Again, the internet is awash with footage taken by hunt monitors, showing that some (but certainly not all) hunt supporters take great exception to their actions being scrutinised or recorded. Any other sportsman or sportswoman would be overjoyed to have cameramen present at their activities, and for their sporting prowess to be broadcast to the world, but not the devotees of blood sports, or so it seems. Why should this be?
Two of the most popular sports in Britain are football and rugby, and one of the most noticeable aspects of these games are the fields upon which they’re played, as the infield playing area is clearly delineated by white lines. When the ball crosses these touchlines, it’s out of play, but this concept doesn’t apply to bloodsports. The fox, the highly unwilling participant in this hopelessly one-sided ‘sport’, has nowhere to go to escape the ‘field of play’, no touchline that he can cross in the hope of finding safety and refuge. There are records of foxes being torn apart by hounds in the middle of towns and villages, within sight of schoolchildren, and hunt monitors are not the only ones to suffer violence, as there are many examples of family pets such as cats and dogs being caught up and killed by rampaging packs of hounds.
Even if the fox believes it has found blessed sanctuary underground, it’s part and parcel of this appalling sport for terriers to be sent in to torment it, bait it or flush it out for the hounds to tear apart, so the concept of a touchline simply does not exist with the so-called ‘sport’ of fox hunting.
And herein surely lies the heart of the matter. This minority pastime relies on overwhelming odds against the fox, and for a nation that prides itself on siding with the underdog, this vile practise is very Un-British. Those many Members of Parliament, including the growing number of our Conservative MPs, do not have to be cajoled into opposing a repeal, because it’s patently obvious that the dwindling band of people who support bloodsports are quite simply ‘out of touch’ with the overwhelming majority of the British public.
The notion of pandering to those who bay for blood pretty much died out with the end of bullbaiting and public executions in this country. A vocal minority may still complain about ‘bad laws’ and present laughably flawed logic about pest control, but the reality is that they’re deluding themselves if they believe that the British public will ever view the tearing apart of our native wildlife with dogs as ‘fair play’, let alone a humane and efficient means of pest control.
Game over.
