Fox Hunting: Blood Sport or Pastime in England?
Few traditions in Great Britain provoke such passionate debate as fox hunting. Opponents call it a “blood sport” — supporters dismiss this view curtly.
A familiar sight in the British countryside for centuries.
Banned since 2005 – yet still practised
This year, too, the hunting clubs will soon be out in force. But instead of chasing a fox, the pack races after a scent trail — the pursuit of live animals has been banned in England since 2005. Animal welfare advocates, however, say this does not go far enough. They are calling for stricter laws: «The fox hunt is a brutal blood sport that belongs in the history books», says Chris Luffingham of the League Against Cruel Sports.
The problem: by following an artificial fox scent, the trained hounds repeatedly flush out real foxes — and chase them to their deaths in violation of the law.
Foxes even roam around Buckingham Palace
Supporters counter: since the ban, clubs have spent 250,000 days engaged in legal trail hunting, with violations occurring in only a fraction of cases. Moreover, recreational hunters could help reduce the supposed “overpopulation” of foxes — a hunter’s tale that has been scientifically debunked.
Accordingly, every fox hunt constitutes a clear violation of animal welfare legislation, as there is no reasonable justification for it. For more than 30 years, at least 18 wildlife biology studies have proven that fox hunting neither regulates populations nor serves any purpose in disease control.
Yet the recreational hunting community has come under considerable pressure. During the most recent season, broadcaster ITV revealed that leading members of a hunt club had admitted that trail hunting serves only to disguise the actual lethal recreational hunting of wildlife.
As a consequence, the National Trust, which manages numerous nature reserves, has among others suspended permission for trail hunting. It will likely not be the last time that animal welfare and tradition clash over the right to define the narrative in Great Britain.
More on the subject of recreational hunting: In the dossier Poaching and hunting crime in Switzerland we document cases, legal questions and recurring patterns. What the research says about this is shown by Hunting fact-checked: the state of research.
The position of IG Wild beim Wild: IG Wild beim Wild rejects recreational hunting. Our model is the canton of Geneva, which has managed without recreational hunting since 1974: without hunting seasons, without hunting dogs, without driven hunts, without high seats, without the animal cruelty and crime that go hand in hand with hunting season elsewhere. What has worked there for over fifty years disproves every position paper by JagdSchweiz. An association that bases its policy on claims it refutes in its own documents is not a professional organisation, but a factory for misinformation.
