Religion and Ethics Forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: Bubbles on July 03, 2015, 07:14:28 PM
-
.
-
Foxes are usually quite timid.
-
Reads more like, 8 people scared of wildlife cause mass hysteria in Cambridge sports club.
Activities in club include standing on chairs squealing like a wee girl if you think you see a spider.
Running around in circles, flapping your hands like a fop, because you find a caterpillar in your organic salad.
-
Were the people dressed as chickens?
-
Foxes do pose an existential threat and cause life changing injuries. Look what's happened to the Greek economy.
-
When I read that story yesterday I found it very hard to credit. I have encountered a number of foxes at our previous property, including a fairly sizable male fox, they ran away from me!
-
When I read that story yesterday I found it very hard to credit. I have encountered a number of foxes at our previous property, including a fairly sizable male fox, they ran away from me!
Yes it does seem strange men running from a fox.
It could easily be overpowered.
-
Were the people dressed as chickens?
I bet they shouted spoonerised versions of Kentucky Fried Chicken when it chased them and not having the pluck to face it would be ducking out of their responsibilities, mind you they probably re-couped at the bar afterwards
ippy
-
When I read that story yesterday I found it very hard to credit. I have encountered a number of foxes at our previous property, including a fairly sizable male fox, they ran away from me!
Yes it does seem strange men running from a fox.
It could easily be overpowered.
Of course it could!
-
Maybe they were frightened that the RSPCA might think they had been harrassing it?
-
Maybe they were frightened that the RSPCA might think they had been harrassing it?
Or maybe they are just attention-seeking imbeciles.
-
Did they killed it and smear the fresh blood over the faces of their first born?
-
I used to live in an area where there were numerous foxes to be seen.. I never saw a fox chase anything, but I twice saw a cat chasing a fox. Whenever I saw one, the poor creature would run away instantly. It's all another attempt to vilify foxes, probably in the hope that it will influence the latest efforts to get the hunting ban overturned.
-
I used to live in an area where there were numerous foxes to be seen.. I never saw a fox chase anything, but I twice saw a cat chasing a fox. Whenever I saw one, the poor creature would run away instantly. It's all another attempt to vilify foxes, probably in the hope that it will influence the latest efforts to get the hunting ban overturned.
Damned straight. Anybody who knows anything about either foxes or domestic moggies or preferably both knows that when it comes to a toe-to-toe, chances are the cat will come off best. How do I know? Seen it more times than I can remember from my landing window.
-
I used to live in an area where there were numerous foxes to be seen.. I never saw a fox chase anything, but I twice saw a cat chasing a fox. Whenever I saw one, the poor creature would run away instantly. It's all another attempt to vilify foxes, probably in the hope that it will influence the latest efforts to get the hunting ban overturned.
Damned straight. Anybody who knows anything about either foxes or domestic moggies or preferably both knows that when it comes to a toe-to-toe, chances are the cat will come off best. How do I know? Seen it more times than I can remember from my landing window.
Once, over a period of time a particular vixen would come round regularly each morning for scraps. After some time she disappeared, and I feared the worst (urban foxes only have a life expectancy of nine months.) But then she re-appeared, and with a litter of five cubs. And I began to feed them daily. One particular little one got so tame he would eat out of my hand: a great privilege for me. Eventually they all left of course; but to suggest that they were in any way fierce or dangerous is complete ignorance of their nature.
-
Would this story have been so hilarious if a child had been savaged by the fox?
You should consider the damage foxes do to sheep.
-
Would this story have been so hilarious if a child had been savaged by the fox?
No, it would be another brick added to the wall of confirmation that if you fuck about with wild creatures and trash the environment, encroaching further and further and further on their habitat year by year with endless estates of shitty little boxes for people and their perpetually open-mawed useless eaters to live in, you're going to have to bear some consequences.
You should consider the damage foxes do to sheep.
Why?
-
"...open-mawed useless eaters..." That's rich coming from the likes of you Shaker. And explains why you are such an avid spokesman for the death industry. Now that maybe what your parents thought of you, but break the nasty circle old man! Have a diet cookie!
-
I would think that Fox either has a disease or has kits near by. They are very protective mothers.
-
You should consider the damage foxes do to sheep.
Why?
Because it would give you an idea of the harm it could do to a child.
-
And explains why you are such an avid spokesman for the death industry.
I'm not a spokesman for the military or animal slaughtering, which are the only death industries that spring immediately to mind.
-
Would this story have been so hilarious if a child had been savaged by the fox?
You should consider the damage foxes do to sheep.
They don't "damage" sheep: they eat to survive. And if it comes to damaging sheep, then look no further than humans - or weren't you aware of that?
-
They don't "damage" sheep: they eat to survive.
Really? And have you seen a hen house after a fox has got into it? A score of dead birds, all killed by the fox, and left uneaten. They eat to survive? Get real.
And this has nothing to do with human diet.
What, by the way, do you feed to that genetically-engineered wolf that you anthropomorphise?
And anyway, you've got it wrong. I was asking you to consider the kind of injury that a fox can inflict on a sheep and to imagine that being done to a child. But perhaps you have no interest in children ...
-
They don't "damage" sheep: they eat to survive.
Really? And have you seen a hen house after a fox has got into it? A score of dead birds, all killed by the fox, and left uneaten. They eat to survive? Get real.
And this has nothing to do with human diet.
What, by the way, do you feed to that genetically-engineered wolf that you anthropomorphise?
As usual your ant-fox stand is based on ignorance. If a fox has the good luck, to him, to find a rich source of food in a hen house, he will try to take it all. He kills with the intention of returning for it all. If you were starving, and most foxes are never far from that state, and you broke into a supermarket, would you just walk off with a tin of beans? No, you would pile up all you could, though you might not get away with it all. Why would a fox, usually desperate for food, stop to gratuitously kill ? Only humans do that - you are anthropomorphising the creatures.
-
Really? And have you seen a hen house after a fox has got into it?
Anybody so unburdened by basic savvy as to be unable to secure a hen house so that it's fox-proof (something I've had to do several times as I used to keep hens for years, living in the countryside at that) has no business keeping hens in the first place as they're clearly unequal to the task. Some of these people almost seem to positively revel in implicitly broadcasting to the world that a fox is their intellectual superior.
-
Like Shaker has experience securing hen houses and runs. Too funny! I make no apologies for shooting two red fox that were able to get through into mom's hen and turkey run. And I make no apologies helping my uncles, who had a large sheep ranch, set traps, shoot and skin coyotes and fox every winter. I make no apologies for allowing a fella to take his hounds on to our land every winter to cull the coydog and coyote populations. They run in packs and if left to breed like rabbits, they become very dangerous to all livestock young. Here in the city, the fox pop isn't a problem but every few years the coyotes must be shot. They become very brave, even on occasion snatching little dogs right out of the owners arms. Sitting on a bench at the bottom of the hill a coyote walked by me so close I could have reached out and touched it. But that's small potatoes. We get grizzly bears and mountain lions coming into the city a few times a year. Last year a mountain lion was laying in wait close to the main doors of one of our hospitals and a grizzly was roaming the neighbourhood next to mine.
-
Of course you make no apology for killing animals. That would require a functioning conscience.
-
Shaker, how sad that your disgusting arrogance gives you such a low opinion of the first nation and aboriginal peoples across this planet. Also, what a low opinion you must have of your family members, alive and dead. Betcha most of them are and were meat eaters How alone your world is. Still hiding from the sun big boy? Have you been able to make some room for getting fit?
-
No it's you thats doing that, by comparing their reasoning and actions to a human being.
They kill because they like it,
Who's anthropomorphising now?
-
I used to live in an area where there were numerous foxes to be seen.. I never saw a fox chase anything, but I twice saw a cat chasing a fox. Whenever I saw one, the poor creature would run away instantly. It's all another attempt to vilify foxes, probably in the hope that it will influence the latest efforts to get the hunting ban overturned.
Damned straight. Anybody who knows anything about either foxes or domestic moggies or preferably both knows that when it comes to a toe-to-toe, chances are the cat will come off best. How do I know? Seen it more times than I can remember from my landing window.
Once, over a period of time a particular vixen would come round regularly each morning for scraps. After some time she disappeared, and I feared the worst (urban foxes only have a life expectancy of nine months.) But then she re-appeared, and with a litter of five cubs. And I began to feed them daily. One particular little one got so tame he would eat out of my hand: a great privilege for me. Eventually they all left of course; but to suggest that they were in any way fierce or dangerous is complete ignorance of their nature.
You tame them, then you get situations where they come into contact with babies, there's been more than one case in the UK.
It's people like you taming a wild animal that's the issue.
Foxes are still classed as vermin, do you feed the local rats as well?
I'm surprised to see you have such a mean and cruel streak in you! Why don't you just don your pink and go out and kill a few foxes - and don't forget to blood a child or two. People with your attitude disgust me.
-
Just noticed - why the apostrophe after 'vicious' in the thread title? ;) ;D :o ::)
-
Of course you make no apology for killing animals. That would require a functioning conscience.
-
While I'm not as extreme as JC here, Shaker, I know where he's coming from.
There's a farm literally seventy metres from my gaff. They had sheep at one point, but now exclusively dairy.
Foxes were a menace at lambing - not every sheep could be taken to the pens or barns, and many remained on the hillside.
Of course the fox can't be blamed for what is, after all, its' natural behaviour; but the farmers had to protect their interests as well, and the shotgun was the only real answer.
It was an effective deterrant to the dogs of townies who thought letting Fido have a nice run in the country amongst the little lambs and calves was a great idea.
One bullet through the brain and the dogs did not repeat the exercise.
This still happens, by the way. Last month, some idiot let their German Shepherd dog loose on a farm a few miles away.
They need a new German Shepherd, now.
I hope the fine they get hit with by the courts means they won't be able to afford one.
-
I used to live in an area where there were numerous foxes to be seen.. I never saw a fox chase anything, but I twice saw a cat chasing a fox. Whenever I saw one, the poor creature would run away instantly. It's all another attempt to vilify foxes, probably in the hope that it will influence the latest efforts to get the hunting ban overturned.
Damned straight. Anybody who knows anything about either foxes or domestic moggies or preferably both knows that when it comes to a toe-to-toe, chances are the cat will come off best. How do I know? Seen it more times than I can remember from my landing window.
Once, over a period of time a particular vixen would come round regularly each morning for scraps. After some time she disappeared, and I feared the worst (urban foxes only have a life expectancy of nine months.) But then she re-appeared, and with a litter of five cubs. And I began to feed them daily. One particular little one got so tame he would eat out of my hand: a great privilege for me. Eventually they all left of course; but to suggest that they were in any way fierce or dangerous is complete ignorance of their nature.
You tame them, then you get situations where they come into contact with babies, there's been more than one case in the UK.
It's people like you taming a wild animal that's the issue.
Foxes are still classed as vermin, do you feed the local rats as well?
I'm surprised to see you have such a mean and cruel streak in you! Why don't you just don your pink and go out and kill a few foxes - and don't forget to blood a child or two. People with your attitude disgust me.
And people like you disgust me, you tame a wild animal, teaching it not to fear humans and when something unfortunate happens you push the responsibility and blame onto someone else..
If you had the wild animals interests at heart, you wouldn't' be so egotistical as to tame them in the first place.
I don't kill foxes, as it happens or badgers and I have both.
However, I don't tame them either.
Both manage quite well without the interference of misguided human beings wanting some egotistical relationship with a wild animal, which is not in the interests of that animal.
For once I agree with Rose. Wild animals should never been tamed that is unfair on them. My husband and I were sicken by a series of programmes, 'Kangaroo Dundee', a few weeks ago. The guy had baby joeys in bed with him, and he treated them like human babies!
I am also of the opinion that ALL animals, dogs and cats included, should be treated as animals NOT humans. Of course they should not be treated in a cruel manner, but they should definitely know their place.
-
:D
Someone should have let their dog out. It would have soon absconded.
Trouble is animals are coming through from France through the tunnel putting us in danger of Rabies.. If it foams at the mouth then run... If it runs from water then lock yourself up until it is Gone.... If all fails get a cricket bat and bump the buggar on the snout it will soon run.
I remember when my daughter was about 18 months and special needs she held her hand out to an Alsatian dog which looked at her and growled. It snarled and went straight for her.
I stood in front of her trolley and as it pounced smacked it hard down on it nose. No dog was going to bite my child... It stopped dead in it's tracked took one look in my eyes and just walked quietly away. It was dumb struck... I had no fear but I did have anger that it was attacking my child...
My father use to smack the boars on the nose with a paddle when they got out of hand.
It was what he taught me which made me act as I did... It quietens the boars and worked on the dog... No need for any real violence a smack hard down on the snout would have probably stopped the fox. I would not have ran I would have faced it head on and slapped it...
-
:D
Someone should have let their dog out. It would have soon absconded.
Trouble is animals are coming through from France through the tunnel putting us in danger of Rabies.. If it foams at the mouth then run... If it runs from water then lock yourself up until it is Gone.... If all fails get a cricket bat and bump the buggar on the snout it will soon run.
I remember when my daughter was about 18 months and special needs she held her hand out to an Alsatian dog which looked at her and growled. It snarled and went straight for her.
I stood in front of her trolley and as it pounced smacked it hard down on it nose. No dog was going to bite my child... It stopped dead in it's tracked took one look in my eyes and just walked quietly away. It was dumb struck... I had no fear but I did have anger that it was attacking my child...
My father use to smack the boars on the nose with a paddle when they got out of hand.
It was what he taught me which made me act as I did... It quietens the boars and worked on the dog... No need for any real violence a smack hard down on the snout would have probably stopped the fox. I would not have ran I would have faced it head on and slapped it...
So would I! However, I certainly don't think foxes in the UK are likely to have rabies!
-
I can't blame city slickers for being afraid and drama prone when dealing with wild critters. Several years ago I got a call from my sister and she was almost in tears. Now she didn't live as many years on the farm as I, so she has a bit of an excuse. Anyways we live close to each other and share the same hill and trails down to the creek and the Bow River. She had her cell phone with her and she had gone down the hill for dome exercise. She was desperate that I come down quick and chase off a coyote that was sitting in the middle of the path a bit further up the hill and staring down at her. I told her I wouldn't come and chase it away and that she was just to keep walking towards it and call me when she got home. Half hour later she called back, the coyote fled when she got close to it. One may think I was mean about the whole thing but this was the sister that thought she would pedal her bike all the way to Golden British Columbia. I had warned her that she would not make it if she doesn't spend a few weeks on her bike getting in shape for the trip. Anyways i had to jump in my truck, drive out to Banff, pick her and her bike up and drive them to Golden, then turn around and drive all the way back so I wouldn't miss my graveyard shift. Too funny
However nobody wants to be bitten by a rabid fox or any other critter. Probably best they ran away.
-
Someone should have let their dog out. It would have soon absconded.
Trouble is animals are coming through from France through the tunnel putting us in danger of Rabies.
Oh Sassy.
Where have you got this scaremongering rubbish from? This is pure tripe.
Do you mean rabid animals being smuggled by drivers or that wild animals are just wandering through the Tunnel? The Pet Passport scheme controls the first.
Believe it or not, the Channel Tunnel has detectors which will soon find any animal which has strayed into it which can then be caught. There is no danger.
Anyway, there is no apparent reservoir of wild animals with rabies in France where there is a continuing programme of leaving oral vaccine-baited caches of meat for wild carnivores. France has been officially rabies-free since 2001. The last time a French person caught rabies from a wild animal was in 1923. The last time a British person caught a rabies-like disease from a wild animal was in 2003 in Scotland when a man died from a variety of the disease found in bats.
Occasionally, people travelling from North Africa bring infected dogs into France and sometimes there is a human death but this is not significantly different from the occasional British death resulting from a dog or cat bite suffered when the person was in South Asia.
Rabies has nothing to do with the Cambridgeshire incident. I believe the fox concerned was eventually shot. If rabies had been found in its carcass we would all know by now.
-
I used to live in an area where there were numerous foxes to be seen.. I never saw a fox chase anything, but I twice saw a cat chasing a fox. Whenever I saw one, the poor creature would run away instantly. It's all another attempt to vilify foxes, probably in the hope that it will influence the latest efforts to get the hunting ban overturned.
Damned straight. Anybody who knows anything about either foxes or domestic moggies or preferably both knows that when it comes to a toe-to-toe, chances are the cat will come off best. How do I know? Seen it more times than I can remember from my landing window.
Once, over a period of time a particular vixen would come round regularly each morning for scraps. After some time she disappeared, and I feared the worst (urban foxes only have a life expectancy of nine months.) But then she re-appeared, and with a litter of five cubs. And I began to feed them daily. One particular little one got so tame he would eat out of my hand: a great privilege for me. Eventually they all left of course; but to suggest that they were in any way fierce or dangerous is complete ignorance of their nature.
You tame them, then you get situations where they come into contact with babies, there's been more than one case in the UK.
It's people like you taming a wild animal that's the issue.
Foxes are still classed as vermin, do you feed the local rats as well?
I'm surprised to see you have such a mean and cruel streak in you! Why don't you just don your pink and go out and kill a few foxes - and don't forget to blood a child or two. People with your attitude disgust me.
And people like you disgust me, you tame a wild animal, teaching it not to fear humans and when something unfortunate happens you push the responsibility and blame onto someone else..
If you had the wild animals interests at heart, you wouldn't' be so egotistical as to tame them in the first place.
I don't kill foxes, as it happens or badgers and I have both.
However, I don't tame them either.
Both manage quite well without the interference of misguided human beings wanting some egotistical relationship with a wild animal, which is not in the interests of that animal.
I did not "tame" any, you silly woman. Please do not ascribe to me, in your biased, nasty, ignorance, things I did not say, or do. It's people like you, who care not for other creatures, who are the menace.
-
I used to live in an area where there were numerous foxes to be seen.. I never saw a fox chase anything, but I twice saw a cat chasing a fox. Whenever I saw one, the poor creature would run away instantly. It's all another attempt to vilify foxes, probably in the hope that it will influence the latest efforts to get the hunting ban overturned.
Damned straight. Anybody who knows anything about either foxes or domestic moggies or preferably both knows that when it comes to a toe-to-toe, chances are the cat will come off best. How do I know? Seen it more times than I can remember from my landing window.
Once, over a period of time a particular vixen would come round regularly each morning for scraps. After some time she disappeared, and I feared the worst (urban foxes only have a life expectancy of nine months.) But then she re-appeared, and with a litter of five cubs. And I began to feed them daily. One particular little one got so tame he would eat out of my hand: a great privilege for me. Eventually they all left of course; but to suggest that they were in any way fierce or dangerous is complete ignorance of their nature.
You tame them, then you get situations where they come into contact with babies, there's been more than one case in the UK.
It's people like you taming a wild animal that's the issue.
Foxes are still classed as vermin, do you feed the local rats as well?
I'm surprised to see you have such a mean and cruel streak in you! Why don't you just don your pink and go out and kill a few foxes - and don't forget to blood a child or two. People with your attitude disgust me.
And people like you disgust me, you tame a wild animal, teaching it not to fear humans and when something unfortunate happens you push the responsibility and blame onto someone else..
If you had the wild animals interests at heart, you wouldn't' be so egotistical as to tame them in the first place.
I don't kill foxes, as it happens or badgers and I have both.
However, I don't tame them either.
Both manage quite well without the interference of misguided human beings wanting some egotistical relationship with a wild animal, which is not in the interests of that animal.
For once I agree with Rose. Wild animals should never been tamed that is unfair on them. My husband and I were sicken by a series of programmes, 'Kangaroo Dundee', a few weeks ago. The guy had baby joeys in bed with him, and he treated them like human babies!
I am also of the opinion that ALL animals, dogs and cats included, should be treated as animals NOT humans. Of course they should not be treated in a cruel manner, but they should definitely know their place.
You have no empathy at all with animals, no understanding, only your usual, crude, dogmatic, nastiness.
-
I used to live in an area where there were numerous foxes to be seen.. I never saw a fox chase anything, but I twice saw a cat chasing a fox. Whenever I saw one, the poor creature would run away instantly. It's all another attempt to vilify foxes, probably in the hope that it will influence the latest efforts to get the hunting ban overturned.
Damned straight. Anybody who knows anything about either foxes or domestic moggies or preferably both knows that when it comes to a toe-to-toe, chances are the cat will come off best. How do I know? Seen it more times than I can remember from my landing window.
Once, over a period of time a particular vixen would come round regularly each morning for scraps. After some time she disappeared, and I feared the worst (urban foxes only have a life expectancy of nine months.) But then she re-appeared, and with a litter of five cubs. And I began to feed them daily. One particular little one got so tame he would eat out of my hand: a great privilege for me. Eventually they all left of course; but to suggest that they were in any way fierce or dangerous is complete ignorance of their nature.
You tame them, then you get situations where they come into contact with babies, there's been more than one case in the UK.
It's people like you taming a wild animal that's the issue.
Foxes are still classed as vermin, do you feed the local rats as well?
I'm surprised to see you have such a mean and cruel streak in you! Why don't you just don your pink and go out and kill a few foxes - and don't forget to blood a child or two. People with your attitude disgust me.
And people like you disgust me, you tame a wild animal, teaching it not to fear humans and when something unfortunate happens you push the responsibility and blame onto someone else..
If you had the wild animals interests at heart, you wouldn't' be so egotistical as to tame them in the first place.
I don't kill foxes, as it happens or badgers and I have both.
However, I don't tame them either.
Both manage quite well without the interference of misguided human beings wanting some egotistical relationship with a wild animal, which is not in the interests of that animal.
I did not "tame" any, you silly woman. Please do not ascribe to me, in your biased, nasty, ignorance, things I did not say, or do. It's people like you, who care not for other creatures, who are the menace.
???
Bashful Anthony said.....
"hs.) But then she re-appeared, and with a litter of five cubs. And I began to feed them daily. One particular little one got so tame he would eat out of my hand: a great privilege for me. Eventually they all left of course; but to suggest that they were in any way fierce or dangerous is complete ignorance of their nature."
?????
Sounds like taming to me.
What do you call it then? Communing with nature?
You Silly man!
No, I call it, "feeding an extremely hungry fox" - a little kindness you clearly do not appreciate. You're a very insensitive woman. As to, "Communing with nature," what would you know about that? I reckon shooting nature is more your line.
You're not so much silly, as just ignorant!
-
No, I call it, "feeding an extremely hungry fox" -
And I call it rampant anthropomorphism. You have no idea whether the fox is hungry or not.
For all you know, your back door is just another in a series of stops that fox makes in its search for easy pickings.
You are interfering with the normal behaviour of the fox. You are altering its role in its niche in its normal habitat. I'm sure you think that you are being kindhearted but you are really interfering in the local ecology.
If you really respect nature then you would let things take their course instead of going gooey-eyed over pretty furry animals. The fox is a high-level predator in the food chain. You action is disturbing the food chain - by feeding this animal and its litter you may be inadvertently increasing the rat or rabbit population.
If you want a nice furry animal, get yourself a teddy bear.
-
No, I call it, "feeding an extremely hungry fox" -
And I call it rampant anthropomorphism. You have no idea whether the fox is hungry or not.
For all you know, your back door is just another in a series of stops that fox makes in its search for easy pickings.
You are interfering with the normal behaviour of the fox. You are altering its role in its niche in its normal habitat. I'm sure you think that you are being kindhearted but you are really interfering in the local ecology.
If you really respect nature then you would let things take their course instead of going gooey-eyed over pretty furry animals. The fox is a high-level predator in the food chain. You action is disturbing the food chain - by feeding this animal and its litter you may be inadvertently increasing the rat or rabbit population.
If you want a nice furry animal, get yourself a teddy bear.
Why would a fox come looking for food unless it was hungry?
And check the word, "anthropomorphism," which you have used totally wrongly here!
You really are talking a lot of airy-fairy clap-trap!!
-
Spot on, Rose!
-
Why would a fox come looking for food unless it was hungry?
Well, like many animals, foxes will cache food in times of plenty, in case the times don't last.
That's why dogs occasionally bring back half putrified rats and rabbits - they've been hidden by foxes.
The fox will eat any protein - no matter in what state of decay it is.
I'm afraid, BA, that your generosity was very probably unfounded - the fox probably regurgitated the food and cached what it did not want.
In an urban setting, this is a health hazard - and a magnet for rats.
-
No, I call it, "feeding an extremely hungry fox" -
And I call it rampant anthropomorphism. You have no idea whether the fox is hungry or not.
For all you know, your back door is just another in a series of stops that fox makes in its search for easy pickings.
You are interfering with the normal behaviour of the fox. You are altering its role in its niche in its normal habitat. I'm sure you think that you are being kindhearted but you are really interfering in the local ecology.
If you really respect nature then you would let things take their course instead of going gooey-eyed over pretty furry animals. The fox is a high-level predator in the food chain. You action is disturbing the food chain - by feeding this animal and its litter you may be inadvertently increasing the rat or rabbit population.
If you want a nice furry animal, get yourself a teddy bear.
Why would a fox come looking for food unless it was hungry?
Because it has learned that it can get food more easily from you than it can by doing its normal predation. It isn't starving - it's on Easy Street. It doesn't have to exert itself, it has you trained.
Here is an academic paper on the diet of urban foxes in relation to anthropogenic food availability in Zurich. It concludes that the supply of such food could support a greater number of foxes.
http://www.cb.iee.unibe.ch/content/e7117/e7118/e8739/e9612/e9614/Contesse_MamBio2004.pdf
And have a look at this one, too:
Saunders, G., et al. "Urban foxes (Vulpes vulpes): food acquisition, time and energy budgeting of a generalized predator." Symposia of the Zoological Society of London. Vol. 65. 1993.
And check the word, "anthropomorphism," which you have used totally wrongly here!
I don't need to. I know exactly what it means - and have done for well over 40 years. Your determination that the motivation of the foxes in coming to you is because they are hungry is pure anthropomorphism. I'm sure they are hungry in the sense that you are hungry before you eat your lunch.
What you are doing is to remove from them the responsibility of hunting for their food - you are interfering in their ecology.
You really are talking a lot of airy-fairy clap-trap!!
I've provided evidence - you only wrap yourself in sentimentality.
-
Why would a fox come looking for food unless it was hungry?
Well, like many animals, foxes will cache food in times of plenty, in case the times don't last.
That's why dogs occasionally bring back half putrified rats and rabbits - they've been hidden by foxes.
The fox will eat any protein - no matter in what state of decay it is.
I'm afraid, BA, that your generosity was very probably unfounded - the fox probably regurgitated the food and cached what it did not want.
In an urban setting, this is a health hazard - and a magnet for rats.
Exactly!
We spent nine months in Eastbourne in 2005, renting an apartment just off the prom. I remember watching five foxes chasing each other around the car park of the building opposite ours. Foxes are BIG problem if they are in urban areas. My sister's previous home was in a town in Surrey, a fox had caused a lot of damage to their garden and that of the next door neighbour. Fortunately it was eventually caught and put down.
-
Foxes are BIG problem if they are in urban areas. My sister's previous home was in a town in Surrey, a fox had caused a lot of damage to their garden and that of the next door neighbour.
Presumably we'd have far fewer foxes in urban areas if the urban areas didn't keep sprawling and expanding year on year because humans seem incapable of keeping their numbers down. It's no good bitching and bleating and whining because you have a fox in your garden when that garden stands in what would, could and should have been open countryside for the fox to roam freely before some arsehole developer came along and covered it in bricks, tarmac and concrete.
Fortunately it was eventually caught and put down.
What a thoroughly vile, but entirely unsurprising, attitude.
-
Foxes are BIG problem if they are in urban areas. My sister's previous home was in a town in Surrey, a fox had caused a lot of damage to their garden and that of the next door neighbour.
Presumably we'd have far fewer foxes in urban areas if the urban areas didn't sprawling and expanding year on year because humans seem incapable of keeping their numbers down. It's no good bitching and bleating and whining because you have a fox in your garden when that garden stands in what would, could and should have been open countryside for the fox to roam freely before some arsehole developer came along and covered it in bricks, tarmac and concrete.
Fortunately it was eventually caught and put down.
What a thoroughly vile, but entirely unsurprising, attitude.
Why, people don't seem to have a problem with exterminating rats?
-
Foxes are BIG problem if they are in urban areas. My sister's previous home was in a town in Surrey, a fox had caused a lot of damage to their garden and that of the next door neighbour.
Presumably we'd have far fewer foxes in urban areas if the urban areas didn't sprawling and expanding year on year because humans seem incapable of keeping their numbers down. It's no good bitching and bleating and whining because you have a fox in your garden when that garden stands in what would, could and should have been open countryside for the fox to roam freely before some arsehole developer came along and covered it in bricks, tarmac and concrete.
Fortunately it was eventually caught and put down.
What a thoroughly vile, but entirely unsurprising, attitude.
Why, people don't seem to have a problem with exterminating rats?
Depends on the person, doesn't it? I have a problem with it.
-
It's all a result of this idiotic idea put about by Christianity that "God" created all life for his 'jewel' (mankind) to have dominion over it.
Unfortunately, evolution gave us the same idea! :(
I could almost believe "God" thought up evolution, if I believed he existed. ;D ;D
-
Would you kill that dirty cockroach in your basement Shaker! Good grief, buying a collar and leash for it and planning to take it for walkies is just stupid! Just roll over on it dude and listen to the crunch!
-
Moron.
-
They don't "damage" sheep: they eat to survive. And if it comes to damaging sheep, then look no further than humans - or weren't you aware of that?
Unfortunately, BA, they can kill for fun, as opposed as for survival. I can think of poultry and sheep farmers who have had animals killed by foxes (sometimes even being caught on camera) yet not a one eaten.
-
They don't "damage" sheep: they eat to survive. And if it comes to damaging sheep, then look no further than humans - or weren't you aware of that?
Unfortunately, BA, they can kill for fun, as opposed as for survival. I can think of poultry and sheep farmers who have had animals killed by foxes (sometimes even being caught on camera) yet not a one eaten.
That happens quite often, I believe
-
A couple years ago in London I believe, a baby was mauled by a fox and the critter bit a finger off the baby.
-
They don't "damage" sheep: they eat to survive. And if it comes to damaging sheep, then look no further than humans - or weren't you aware of that?
Unfortunately, BA, they can kill for fun, as opposed as for survival. I can think of poultry and sheep farmers who have had animals killed by foxes (sometimes even being caught on camera) yet not a one eaten.
-
Agreed, Hope.
Once you've seen a lamb with its' abdomen ripped open, and obvious fox paw amarks around the hilly area where the deed was done, you, like me, would class that as 'damage'.
Foxes will kill - but not 'for fun'. If there's a glut of what they see as prey, they will kill it. They might not open the carcasse at that time, but take it and cache it if it is small enough, or leave it in the expetation of returning to it when needed. Meantime the crows and ravens do their work.
Sadly, sometimes a lamb is injured, but not fatally, and left. The sight of such a lamb which has been attacked by foxes and later harried by corvids, but is still alive, is distressing, but that's what foxes do. It's part of nature, red in tooth and claw.
-
uthor=Floo link=topic=10550.msg536888#msg536888 date=1436513811]
Spot on, Ro
Imo, anybody who disagrees with me is "spot-on" for hapless Floo - no opinion of her own, though, imo, ;D
-
They don't "damage" sheep: they eat to survive. And if it comes to damaging sheep, then look no further than humans - or weren't you aware of that?
Unfortunately, BA, they can kill for fun, as opposed as for survival. I can think of poultry and sheep farmers who have had animals killed by foxes (sometimes even being caught on camera) yet not a one eaten.
You are talking nonsense, and unsubstantiated nonsense. Can you quote some facts to back-up your opinion? Foxes behave as Nature intended, and to vilify them is ignorant: they can't help themselves. And it's rich comment from a member of the only species that does actually kill on a massive scale, for no reason.
-
I am amazed (why?) by the callous indifference by some posters to the lives of other creatures we share this planet with. The fox is one of the most abused and vilified creatures on Earth, and in actuality, all it is doing is trying to get by. I suppose all you upright citizens will be hoping the unctuous pro fox-huters get their amendment to the anti-hunting Act passed, so they can return to the torturing and mutilation of the wretched creatures. You are a nasty and brutish bunch.
-
Fox hunting is barbaric.
There's no two ways about it, BA.
I loathe the concept.
However, on the occasions where a hound DID get a fox, the fox was invariably ripped to shreds.
Sometimes, gamekeepers and farmers aren't so accurate when it comes to necarily shooting a fox, and the animal lives on, in agony, injured, for hours, or days, slowly starving to death.
Or chews its' leg off in the effort to rid itself of the agony.
Traps and poisons are equally flawed, with the added hazard of indiscriminately killing unrelated species.
I don't know what the answer IS, but disposal of what can be little more than vermin in the countryside can be fraught with distress.
-
I am amazed (why?) by the callous indifference by some posters to the lives of other creatures we share this planet with. The fox is one of the most abused and vilified creatures on Earth, and in actuality, all it is doing is trying to get by. I suppose all you upright citizens will be hoping the unctuous pro fox-huters get their amendment to the anti-hunting Act passed, so they can return to the torturing and mutilation of the wretched creatures. You are a nasty and brutish bunch.
What an unpleasant, presumptuous, uninformed, and silly post.
In the first place you have assumed - on the basis of no information at all - that people who have views that differ from your own have motives that are opposed to yours. You do not know what my opinions are on fox hunting - because I have never volunteered them. You will get no brownie points from me for your characterisation of me - or of my fellow posters who have a greater understanding of "nature" than you have. Your postings show no development in understanding than that you probably acquired in Nature Study at your infant school.
The fact that you have chosen associate an understanding of the reality of life on this planet for one particular species with "the unspeakable in hot pursuit of the uneatable" is unfortunate.
We are not abusing or vilifying the fox. We are telling you what life in the wild is really like - it's not the Disney world of your sentimentality.
The fox is a carnivore and a predator. That means it kills other animals and eats them. It has an innate drive (you would say an instinct) to kill more than it immediately needs because, well, you never know, there might not be any food tomorrow.
In its ecological niche it is a very successful animal: it is at the top of its food chain. It will kill any animal that it perceives to be small or weaker than itself. Thus it will kill rats, mice, rabbits (a non-native introduced species), birds, small dogs, small cats, waterfowl, lambs, chickens, fawns, human babies ... you name it.
It has also learned that it can be commensal with homo sapiens. Homo sapiens leaves food waste in things called dustbins and elsewhere and it requires less effort to scavenge than to hunt. There are even specimens of homo sapiens that will give it food and save it the task of even scavenging!
This has resulted in foxes deciding to live in urban areas. Note: the fox has invaded cities. It has not had its natural environment taken from it, it has abandoned its natural environment. There is still plenty of countryside left for the fox - 93% of the total land mass of the UK. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18623096)
All of life depends on other life in order to survive and this usually means that a surviving organism has to work for its food. The higher up the food chain the more likely it is that protein will be provided in the form of meat. A top level predator is a meat-eater by definition.
This has consequences for all animals.
Are you aware that most male animals will die virgins? Only the strongest and most aggressive males will mate.
Are you aware that almost no animal will ever reach old age? As it ages it weakens, it will look for easier and easier prey, become predated itself - sometimes by its own species or contract some illness or suffer catastrophic injury.
Are you aware that bightly coloured male birds are advertising themselves as prey to raptors? So that the dull-plumaged females can get on with the business of safely producing offspring.
Nobody that has responded to your ill-informed and naive postings is callous or indifferent. You cannot see it as such, but it is your behaviour which is harming the fox.
-
Fox hunting is barbaric.
There's no two ways about it, BA.
I loathe the concept.
However, on the occasions where a hound DID get a fox, the fox was invariably ripped to shreds.
Sometimes, gamekeepers and farmers aren't so accurate when it comes to necarily shooting a fox, and the animal lives on, in agony, injured, for hours, or days, slowly starving to death.
Or chews its' leg off in the effort to rid itself of the agony.
Traps and poisons are equally flawed, with the added hazard of indiscriminately killing unrelated species.
I don't know what the answer IS, but disposal of what can be little more than vermin in the countryside can be fraught with distress.
Completely agree with this. If the ban of fox hunting solely had animal welfare at its heart then the 'sport' of lamping would have been banned also. It's bad enough when farmers try to shoot foxes, let alone gangs in Land Rovers out for a bit of excitement.
I once read about an urban 'animal welfare group' who rounded up fixes to set them free in the countryside. A farmer woke up to find six or seven unafraid foxes in his farmyard so he shot them all.
I live somewhere that farmers generally encourage foxes because they want the rabbit numbers kept down, but I know someone who farms free-range organic geese and he can't stop every fox from getting near them. Generally his Jack Russel gets there first though. It's not something I condone, but the alternatives are no better. Yes, maybe he shouldn't farm geese, but it is his livelihood and they are as humanely kept and dispatched as possible - no need for abbatoirs -and it keeps food on the table for his kids.
If anyone is interested a well-known wetland wildlife sanctuary did find a solution to the problem of a fox that was taking the eggs of rare and protected species, according to rumour. After trapping and shooting failed it called in the local foxhounds - pre-hunt ban, obviously- not for sport, but because the hounds did the job efficiently.
-
I posted that from experience, Rhi.
The area in which I live is blessed with moorland, farmland and three shooting estates (mainly pheasant), as well as deciduous and coniferous forestation.
A paradise for wildlife, which includes foxes.
Foxes, like any well established predator, will try for the easiest prey, especially since they are rearing young.
That means domesticated fowl, and semi-domesticated sheep.
That's what they do - it's part of what makes them foxes.
But those who live off the land have to control them, and using dogs - usually terriers - to locate their earth, then either flushing them out and shooting them, or netting them and dispatching them, is fraught with difficulty, and many foxes escape, injured, to die in agony. Farmers may not have time to pursue and humanely destroy them, and employing professionals costs money which few rural farmers can afford.
That means, that, whether we like it or not, many foxes die in unspeakable, prolonged agony.
Hounds - or lurchers, if permitted, would have chased the terrified animals - and, yes, I agree that's wrong.
But at least the fox had a chance of escape, or, if caught, death was instant.
-
#72 HH, couldn't agree more. Generally here in the sticks foxes are still wild and timid, which is beautiful - I love seeing them dash through my garden but take a live-and-let-live attitude to them - unless one was clearly in agony in which case I'd get help.
However, a new neighbour has an orchard behind their property and they started feeding foxes -I believe a vixen with cubs - with a leg of lamb bought each week as well as scraps. At the same time the village school (next to the orchard) noticed a problem with foxes coming into the playground and playing field. The fox droppings became hazardous to the children as they kept treading on them and getting them on clothes etc. So the head arranged for the fox to be trapped and shot by a local farmer.
-
Rhi
What an excellent example of the consequences of interfering with nature.
-
HH, I must admit I do sometimes interfere with nature in that I put water and food out for birds and deliberately leave wild areas -long grass, nettles, log piles etc- in my garden as additional habitat. But I see that as trying to put something back for those species that are very vulnerable to human activity, as well as increasing my own natural gardening helpers (I have always gardened organically).
-
Rhi
What an excellent example of the consequences of interfering with nature.
I know rather a lot about interfering with nature and its consequences, since the seven and a half acre field about fifteen paces from my front gate, home to umpteen species of plants, birds, insects and a family of foxes, and which used to look like this:
http://goo.gl/3a44DX
http://goo.gl/2pudFW
http://goo.gl/cz7OFv
now looks like this:
http://goo.gl/CaV31O
-
Which brings us rather neatly to the RSPB selling off a piece of land it was left as a wildlife haven for housing because it isn't 'interesting' enough. 20 acres is too small an area to 'rewild', apparently.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/greenpolitics/planning/11655089/RSPB-ignores-widows-wishes-and-looks-to-sell-land-for-housing.html
-
Which brings us rather neatly to the RSPB selling off a piece of land it was left as a wildlife haven for housing because it isn't 'interesting' enough. 20 acres is too small an area to 'rewild', apparently.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/greenpolitics/planning/11655089/RSPB-ignores-widows-wishes-and-looks-to-sell-land-for-housing.html
If true, that is disgusting! >:(
-
This is the RSPB's response.
http://www.rspb.org.uk/community/ourwork/b/martinharper/archive/2015/06/06/the-precious-gift.aspx
-
Jesus Christ >:(
-
Rhi
What an excellent example of the consequences of interfering with nature.
I know rather a lot about interfering with nature and its consequences, since the seven and a half acre field about fifteen paces from my front gate, home to umpteen species of plants, birds, insects and a family of foxes, and which used to look like this:
http://goo.gl/3a44DX
http://goo.gl/2pudFW
http://goo.gl/cz7OFv
now looks like this:
http://goo.gl/CaV31O
Yes, but you have to admit, when it is finished the development will be a wonderful environment for the mendicant foxes of BA's aquaintance.
I have no idea whether the development is essential or not. It is a pity, but that is the way of the world. However, instead of being a failed NIMBY, why can you not rejoice in a positive and creative approach to the problem which is just a few miles away from me:
http://www.heartofenglandforest.com/about-us/ ...?
Already a million trees have been planted.
-
Yes, but you have to admit, when it is finished the development will be a wonderful environment for the mendicant foxes of BA's aquaintance.
As far as I'm able to tell the foxes are of a like mind with close on 100% of the local residents in preferring seven and a half acres of quiet green countryside.
I have no idea whether the development is essential or not.
To developers all developments are essential, because they make money.
It is a pity, but that is the way of the world. However, instead of being a failed NIMBY
Not a NIMBY so much as a BANANA - Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything.
why can you not rejoice in a positive and creative approach to the problem which is just a few miles away from me:
http://www.heartofenglandforest.com/about-us/
Already a million trees have been planted.
I know - one of them mine. I don't see how this modest project offsets the continuing daily rape of the natural world and its inhabitants because humans are unable to stop breeding.
-
You have an immigration problem old timer. You Brits are NOT over breeding. Get an education. Labour governments flooded your little island. You will become a minority in your own country one day. That actually has a good and bad side to it.
Am I wrong that the UK has strong environmental regulations? That developer would have had to jump through a lot of hoops to get approval. So we know that there were no species put at risk by that development. We also know that where you live was once a field of birds and rodents, fox and flowers and so on. But you are happy to squat where you are, fully knowing what was lost so you and those before you, could have a developed place to live.
-
Fox and bigger dogs like our coyotes adapt well to urban sprawl. I live close to the centre of a million plus city. In my area we have Coyote and fox. In fact the creek at the bottom of my hill in named Fox Creek. Now when the white men came to settle this area on the edge of the great plains, they pushed the grizzly bear into the mountains. But those huge creatures still visit my city every year as do the mountain lions. I do not believe in developing sensitive areas that put a species at risk but we are talking fox not humpback whales.
-
:D
Someone should have let their dog out. It would have soon absconded.
Trouble is animals are coming through from France through the tunnel putting us in danger of Rabies.. If it foams at the mouth then run... If it runs from water then lock yourself up until it is Gone.... If all fails get a cricket bat and bump the buggar on the snout it will soon run.
I remember when my daughter was about 18 months and special needs she held her hand out to an Alsatian dog which looked at her and growled. It snarled and went straight for her.
I stood in front of her trolley and as it pounced smacked it hard down on it nose. No dog was going to bite my child... It stopped dead in it's tracked took one look in my eyes and just walked quietly away. It was dumb struck... I had no fear but I did have anger that it was attacking my child...
My father use to smack the boars on the nose with a paddle when they got out of hand.
It was what he taught me which made me act as I did... It quietens the boars and worked on the dog... No need for any real violence a smack hard down on the snout would have probably stopped the fox. I would not have ran I would have faced it head on and slapped it...
So would I! However, I certainly don't think foxes in the UK are likely to have rabies!
I saw a program on tv some years back about the dangers of the tunnel. Rabies not in this country but they were affecting some other countries in Europe. They spoke about the dangers of rabies. Princess Anne has been immunised against Rabies..
-
Someone should have let their dog out. It would have soon absconded.
Trouble is animals are coming through from France through the tunnel putting us in danger of Rabies.
Oh Sassy.
Where have you got this scaremongering rubbish from? This is pure tripe.
Do you mean rabid animals being smuggled by drivers or that wild animals are just wandering through the Tunnel? The Pet Passport scheme controls the first.
Believe it or not, the Channel Tunnel has detectors which will soon find any animal which has strayed into it which can then be caught. There is no danger.
Anyway, there is no apparent reservoir of wild animals with rabies in France where there is a continuing programme of leaving oral vaccine-baited caches of meat for wild carnivores. France has been officially rabies-free since 2001. The last time a French person caught rabies from a wild animal was in 1923. The last time a British person caught a rabies-like disease from a wild animal was in 2003 in Scotland when a man died from a variety of the disease found in bats.
Occasionally, people travelling from North Africa bring infected dogs into France and sometimes there is a human death but this is not significantly different from the occasional British death resulting from a dog or cat bite suffered when the person was in South Asia.
Rabies has nothing to do with the Cambridgeshire incident. I believe the fox concerned was eventually shot. If rabies had been found in its carcass we would all know by now.
http://www.theborneopost.com/2014/05/05/20-years-on-british-fears-over-channel-tunnel-lost-at-sea/
Would that be the species of bat found in 1996 which supposedly didn't affect humans?
In fact, a wild rabid animal was found on a beach in southern England in 1996, the first trace of rabies in the country since 1922.
All you did was google as you can see...
The fact is that rabies and animals can still get through the tunnel.
WITHOUT being captured.
If the danger is not real...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24569593
Then why are they warning us that the rules need reviewing from the danger
-
Sass
The greatest danger for rabid animals coming into Britain is not the Channel Tunnel. That has appropriate safeguards built into it. It is also 30 miles long and that is a considerable safeguard in itself.
No, the greatest danger comes from small boats crossing the English Channel carrying undeclared pets.
ADDITION TO ORIGINAL POST
I have just read the article you cite as "evidence". It comes from a newspaper published in Borneo of all places and is a rag tag and bobtail piece about the UK's relationship with Europe - sort of ...
Your scary bit says:
In fact, a wild rabid animal was found on a beach in southern England in 1996, the first trace of rabies in the country since 1922.
But vets revealed that the offending creature, a Daubenton’s bat — an insectivore very common in France — was carrying a virus not transmissible to dogs, mammals, horses or foxes.
The animal was a bat. It could have flown or been blown across the English Channel. No evidence of any Channel Tunnel involvement at all.
No indication of where it was found either. It could have been anywhere from the Thames estuary to Lands End.
It was carrying a virus not transmissible to the animal which overwhelmingly is cause of rabies in humans - the dog.
-
:D
Someone should have let their dog out. It would have soon absconded.
Trouble is animals are coming through from France through the tunnel putting us in danger of Rabies.. If it foams at the mouth then run... If it runs from water then lock yourself up until it is Gone.... If all fails get a cricket bat and bump the buggar on the snout it will soon run.
I remember when my daughter was about 18 months and special needs she held her hand out to an Alsatian dog which looked at her and growled. It snarled and went straight for her.
I stood in front of her trolley and as it pounced smacked it hard down on it nose. No dog was going to bite my child... It stopped dead in it's tracked took one look in my eyes and just walked quietly away. It was dumb struck... I had no fear but I did have anger that it was attacking my child...
My father use to smack the boars on the nose with a paddle when they got out of hand.
It was what he taught me which made me act as I did... It quietens the boars and worked on the dog... No need for any real violence a smack hard down on the snout would have probably stopped the fox. I would not have ran I would have faced it head on and slapped it...
So would I! However, I certainly don't think foxes in the UK are likely to have rabies!
I saw a program on tv some years back about the dangers of the tunnel. Rabies not in this country but they were affecting some other countries in Europe. They spoke about the dangers of rabies. Princess Anne has been immunised against Rabies..
Citation?
-
You have an immigration problem old timer. You Brits are NOT over breeding. Get an education. Labour governments flooded your little island. You will become a minority in your own country one day. That actually has a good and bad side to it.
-
Scotland has no issues with immigration.
The more, the merrier.
-
Am I wrong that the UK has strong environmental regulations? That developer would have had to jump through a lot of hoops to get approval. So we know that there were no species put at risk by that development. We also know that where you live was once a field of birds and rodents, fox and flowers and so on. But you are happy to squat where you are, fully knowing what was lost so you and those before you, could have a developed place to live.
-
Yes.
Environmental issues are a devolved matter.
There are no UK wide environmental regulations.
-
Anchorman,
Here in Canada we have provincial and then federal environment regulations and boards that asses proposals. How does it work in the UK. Who makes the regulations and who examines development proposals? I know you must have some regulators and panels that asses? You must have, being that it is a lot tougher to develop in the UK than here.
Environmental regulations GOV.UK
-
Is Sass talking about the Princess Royal or the Princess Anne Fire Dept. (smilies)
-
Anchorman,
Here in Canada we have provincial and then federal environment regulations and boards that asses proposals. How does it work in the UK. Who makes the regulations and who examines development proposals? I know you must have some regulators and panels that asses? You must have, being that it is a lot tougher to develop in the UK than here.
Environmental regulations GOV.UK
-
Environmental issues are the province of the Scottish Government, as are wildlife regulations.
http://www.gov.scot/Topics/Environment
-
So you are not without government regulations. Doesn't matter what government but you have tough regulations and regulators yes?
I get that your laws are not the same as elsewhere in the UK but all of ya have to bow low to the EU.
-
So you are not without government regulations. Doesn't matter what government but you have tough regulations and regulators yes?
I get that your laws are not the same as elsewhere in the UK but all of ya have to bow low to the EU.
-
What does that have to do with Scotland having ultimate control over Scotland's environmental and wildlife legislation?
-
I am amazed (why?) by the callous indifference by some posters to the lives of other creatures we share this planet with. The fox is one of the most abused and vilified creatures on Earth, and in actuality, all it is doing is trying to get by. I suppose all you upright citizens will be hoping the unctuous pro fox-huters get their amendment to the anti-hunting Act passed, so they can return to the torturing and mutilation of the wretched creatures. You are a nasty and brutish bunch.
What an unpleasant, presumptuous, uninformed, and silly post.
In the first place you have assumed - on the basis of no information at all - that people who have views that differ from your own have motives that are opposed to yours. You do not know what my opinions are on fox hunting - because I have never volunteered them. You will get no brownie points from me for your characterisation of me - or of my fellow posters who have a greater understanding of "nature" than you have. Your postings show no development in understanding than that you probably acquired in Nature Study at your infant school.
The fact that you have chosen associate an understanding of the reality of life on this planet for one particular species with "the unspeakable in hot pursuit of the uneatable" is unfortunate.
We are not abusing or vilifying the fox. We are telling you what life in the wild is really like - it's not the Disney world of your sentimentality.
The fox is a carnivore and a predator. That means it kills other animals and eats them. It has an innate drive (you would say an instinct) to kill more than it immediately needs because, well, you never know, there might not be any food tomorrow.
In its ecological niche it is a very successful animal: it is at the top of its food chain. It will kill any animal that it perceives to be small or weaker than itself. Thus it will kill rats, mice, rabbits (a non-native introduced species), birds, small dogs, small cats, waterfowl, lambs, chickens, fawns, human babies ... you name it.
It has also learned that it can be commensal with homo sapiens. Homo sapiens leaves food waste in things called dustbins and elsewhere and it requires less effort to scavenge than to hunt. There are even specimens of homo sapiens that will give it food and save it the task of even scavenging!
This has resulted in foxes deciding to live in urban areas. Note: the fox has invaded cities. It has not had its natural environment taken from it, it has abandoned its natural environment. There is still plenty of countryside left for the fox - 93% of the total land mass of the UK. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18623096)
All of life depends on other life in order to survive and this usually means that a surviving organism has to work for its food. The higher up the food chain the more likely it is that protein will be provided in the form of meat. A top level predator is a meat-eater by definition.
This has consequences for all animals.
Are you aware that most male animals will die virgins? Only the strongest and most aggressive males will mate.
Are you aware that almost no animal will ever reach old age? As it ages it weakens, it will look for easier and easier prey, become predated itself - sometimes by its own species or contract some illness or suffer catastrophic injury.
Are you aware that bightly coloured male birds are advertising themselves as prey to raptors? So that the dull-plumaged females can get on with the business of safely producing offspring.
Nobody that has responded to your ill-informed and naive postings is callous or indifferent. You cannot see it as such, but it is your behaviour which is harming the fox.
I cannot abide the likes of you: "I don't like it: it's a nuisance: let's kill it." No verifiable evidence, just a crude and vicious condemnation.. You call me silly and sentimental: I'd rather be that than intolerant, brutish, and without pity. You sad man/woman.
-
I cannot abide the likes of you: "I don't like it: it's a nuisance: let's kill it." No verifiable evidence, just a crude and vicious condemnation.. You call me silly and sentimental: I'd rather be that than intolerant, brutish, and without pity. You sad man/woman.
Where have I said "Let's kill it?"
Where have I said "It's a nuisance?"
Where have I made a "crude and vicious condemnation?"
Be careful in the way you reply, I would not want you to bear false witness.
The replies in which you criticise me, and anyone else who suggests that your behaviour though well intentioned is misguided, are intolerant and filled with fury.
I have studied animal behaviour - ethology. I know the way that Nature works. I cannot say that it is particularly edifying, but we must accept it as it is and know that - for wild animals - life is a trial in which only the strongest and fittest survive, and then only while they stay strong and fit. I have never knowingly or intentionally killed an animal in my life and I resent the thoroughly unpleasant way in which you impute intentions or attitudes to me that I do not have.
If you really are concerned for the welfare of wild animals, you would be well advised to consider the way in which you are interfering with their normal way of life.
-
Oh, a Social Darwinist in 2015. How quaint.
For Christ's sake don't tell Vlad; he'll be all over it like the white on rice.
-
Oh, a Social Darwinist in 2015. How quaint.
For Christ's sake don't tell Vlad; he'll be all over it like the white on rice.
Erm ... where have I said anything that identifies me as a Social Darwinist? Where have I said anything about human society or economics? I suppose I must count myself fortunate you didn't call me a Thatcherite.
Actually, I'm a psychologist. And probably a neo-Darwinist.
-
I cannot abide the likes of you: "I don't like it: it's a nuisance: let's kill it." No verifiable evidence, just a crude and vicious condemnation.. You call me silly and sentimental: I'd rather be that than intolerant, brutish, and without pity. You sad man/woman.
Where have I said "Let's kill it?"
Where have I said "It's a nuisance?"
Where have I made a "crude and vicious condemnation?"
Be careful in the way you reply, I would not want you to bear false witness.
The replies in which you criticise me, and anyone else who suggests that your behaviour though well intentioned is misguided, are intolerant and filled with fury.
I have studied animal behaviour - ethology. I know the way that Nature works. I cannot say that it is particularly edifying, but we must accept it as it is and know that - for wild animals - life is a trial in which only the strongest and fittest survive, and then only while they stay strong and fit. I have never knowingly or intentionally killed an animal in my life and I resent the thoroughly unpleasant way in which you impute intentions or attitudes to me that I do not have.
If you really are concerned for the welfare of wild animals, you would be well advised to consider the way in which you are interfering with their normal way of life.
Your sentiments , if that is a word that applies to you, are clear enough. I doubt that helping one or two foxes from going completely hungry, a few times, is exactly interfering with their normal way of life to any appreciable extent. If you seriously claim that, then you are totally unrealistic.
-
Anchorman,
Calm down. I really don't get why you had to nit pick and point out that Scotlandshire has authority in that area. In that light I opted to point out that the EU has the final authority on environmental laws in your Scotlandshire. And it does or you will be kicked to the curb.
-
Anchorman,
Calm down. I really don't get why you had to nit pick and point out that Scotlandshire has authority in that area. In that light I opted to point out that the EU has the final authority on environmental laws in your Scotlandshire. And it does or you will be kicked to the curb.
-
In using the term 'Scotlandshire, you DO realise you are quoting from a very funny - ANTI-unionist site - BBC Scotlandshire, don't you?
And, again, because of the Scotland act 1998 (enacted by the Westminster Labour government) Westminster ceded all power over wildlife, pest control, and territorial environmental management to Scotland.
Any change would require further Westminster legislation - which will not happen in this parliament.
The present outfit's in enough trouble without starting that particular idea in motion.
Therefore, as it stands, Westminster has no legal or constitutional power to change Scottish environmental policy or legislation.