The late Phil Drabble, co-presenter of "One Man and his Dog", and not a softie, long ago pointed out that gentlemen of England and Wales in times gone by imported foxes from the continent, when it looked as if the stock in Britain was in decline. That was indication enough that it was the sport which was uppermost in their minds when they took to horse, not keeping charlie in check.
Yet a succession of apologists for fox-hunting have been allowed to get away with the argument that a main reason for the activitiy is to keep the fox population down. I can recall only one honest media statement about the pursuit when the then editor of "Country Life" (it might have been Dorian Williams) expressed it on "Any Questions?" many years ago.
Until now. Conservative Glyn Davies has often been too honest for his own good. In this piece on his blog, he straightforwardly argues in favour of a healthy fox population and of fox-hunting for its own sake.
3 comments:
The unspeakable after the uneatable.
Thank you, Oscar.
There's also Balfour's response (presumably to an invitation to go fox-hunting): "I do not see why I should break my neck because a dog chooses to run after a nasty smell".
I understand that RTAs kill more foxes than hunts. I have seen a fox killed in an RTA and it was quick, presumably because the van in question was doing 65 mph on the M4 near Llanelli.
I haven't seen a fox killed by a hunt, nor do I want too.
Unfortunately, deaths on our roads are accepted, be they human or fox
Post a Comment