A-hunting we will go... (From York Press)

Mr Anderson wrote:
Richard Catton says. A-hunting we will go... No they didn't. It's illegal Richard so stop promoting it!

Hunting4olympics wrote:
Great to see so many people out doing a historic past time which was ludicrously outlawed by our previous dictatorship!
Under no circumstances should pest control of been banned, especially given the cost of shotgun cartridges these days!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Big Bad Wolf wrote:

Mr Anderson wrote:
Richard Catton says. A-hunting we will go... No they didn't. It's illegal Richard so stop promoting it!

No it's not.....

Woody Mellor wrote:

Big Bad Wolf wrote:

Mr Anderson wrote: Richard Catton says. A-hunting we will go... No they didn't. It's illegal Richard so stop promoting it!

No it's not.....

What? It's NOT illegal to hunt foxes with dogs? That's what the headline and picture implies.

baileyuk wrote:
simple answer is those that dont agree with the support numbers,, go out and have a look yourself and dont believe what the press say..

the fact is since the ban support numbers are going up year on year!!

I wonder where those that campaigned against it are now?? millions of animals are suffering horrendous deaths in halal slaughterhouses but i never ever see anyone campaigning against this,, I wonder why??

twotonethomas wrote:

baileyuk wrote: simple answer is those that dont agree with the support numbers,, go out and have a look yourself and dont believe what the press say.. the fact is since the ban support numbers are going up year on year!! I wonder where those that campaigned against it are now?? millions of animals are suffering horrendous deaths in halal slaughterhouses but i never ever see anyone campaigning against this,, I wonder why??

'the fact is since the ban support numbers are going up year on year!' This is the problem with the bloodsports fanatics, there maths skills are as lacking as their compassion. In 1993 they claimed that 1 million would support hunting on Boxing Day In 1996 they claimed 320000 would support hunting on Boxing Day. This year they claimed 250000 would support hunting on Boxing Day. And at the same time they say hunting is more popular than before the ban. CUCKOO

twotonethomas wrote:

Hunting4olympics wrote: Great to see so many people out doing a historic past time which was ludicrously outlawed by our previous dictatorship! Under no circumstances should pest control of been banned, especially given the cost of shotgun cartridges these days!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And I assume, unless you are a hypocrite, that you have the same opinion of the 7 'men' convicted of badger digging in Ryedale last month?

Hunting4olympics wrote:

twotonethomas wrote:

Hunting4olympics wrote: Great to see so many people out doing a historic past time which was ludicrously outlawed by our previous dictatorship! Under no circumstances should pest control of been banned, especially given the cost of shotgun cartridges these days!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And I assume, unless you are a hypocrite, that you have the same opinion of the 7 'men' convicted of badger digging in Ryedale last month?

twotonethomas I dont see how I would be being a hypocrite by saying what they did was wrong and infact sick, incase you didnt notice no where have i said animals should be killed in anyway possible. organised pest control and sport such as hunting is a thing which has been around longer than you or I and shall stay around longer than you or I. Secondly you figures are ridiculous. Please find these figures from an independant source and you may have a point. but clearly as these are from your tree hugging townie officianado group they show what you want I could also produce figures showing a massive increase in hunt suscribers and also day hunting passes.

You people really do embarass yourselves!

Hunting4olympics wrote:

YorkPatrol wrote:
It was a great landmark when fox hunting was banned – A truly barbaric “pastime” enjoyed by toffee nosed fools Killing for fun has no place in today’s society

Funny that, last time I checked this country was a democracy, personally I find the fact your mrs oarades around on street corners disgusting but would never seek for your city dwelling past times to be outlawed. ;)

Hunting4olympics wrote:
Read the whole thing and the source, you will find it is the membership how on earth would expect them to know exactly who is going to turn up without prividing full membership numbers. Its the only way to estimate. You will find a football team will say it has a full house and yet still all seats arent full on matchday because not all season ticket holders have turned up. Its the same kind of thing but just keep going manipulating it to your own means. Its what you anti's do all the time just makes yourselves look more and more stupid ;)

Hunting4olympics wrote:
Great to see so many people out doing a historic past time which was ludicrously outlawed by our previous dictatorship!
Under no circumstances should pest control of been banned, especially given the cost of shotgun cartridges these days!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hunting4olympics wrote:
York Patrol. That perverse tradition has never happened. Similar i am sure to the widespread belief that you my friend are sandwich filling?

baileyuk wrote:
whats wrong with chasing animals?? how many of you have the nice furry things call cats that chase small animals/birds ect, and the owner being proud when felix leaves the young sparrow on back step... number of birds in our back gardens are decling wit the number of cats accelerating are we going to see a cat ban next?

baileyuk wrote:
york patrol, the recent hunt i attended was also attended by a police officer,, did he call for back up for the number of arrests of huntsmen breaking the law?? no he took part,, as do a lot of countryside officers!

twotone i have never mentioned badger baiting, however I do believe that the cull should take place, however the baiting side, it just shows how little you understand the term country sport,, the five caught were from york and perhaps the neighbours family and friends of the guys concerned should be asking why these guys needed the dogs that they had and what they were doing with them..

what town folk dont realise or know is the amount of time huntsmen or local followers of the hunt put in to protect the countryside.. have you seen the damage 1 fox can do in a few seconds in a chicken coop?

i mentioned it on here some time back when lush were using the fox hunting thing to promote their reopening in york, that foxes were getting too domesticated and protected and that it would only be a matter of time before a child got hurt, infact at the time you could do a search and find several stories of nearmisses, i got ridiculed but a few days later the headlines were foxes snatching babies from their beds, think it was London..

Digeorge wrote:
Woody Mellor

57 convictions making a total of 145 on the site

And on that said site, notable landowners, horse racing and Sirs and Fat Lady were convicted.

Difficulty in getting convictions because of Schedule 1. Read it!

So you are a vegetarian then?

baileyuk wrote:
your failing to find it because you are too busy trying to trip me up! you suggested that fox attacks on humans were false and ive just proved you wrong and pointed you into a direction to evidence that..

the earlier ? about badger baiting that you ask, as ive said i never mentioned it, again your trying to trip me up,, did it work? no

so go on resort back to any spelling or punctuation mistake that I have done..

1 thing is for sure i will be out on saturday enjoying a pastime that is embedded in this countries history,,

baileyuk wrote:
hula understand what you saying, however I have also witnessed animal rights protesters putting ball bearings on the roads so that horses will fall, resulting in injury to the rider and possible death to the horse..
what alot forget is that hunting like everything else moves on what was done 30 years ago does not happen today, and not because of the ban!

Digeorge wrote:
Woody Mellor

You stated a figure of convictions from I don't know where and I came across another one on the Country Alliance site.

I grew up too, we have differences of opinion, I grew up in the country and it was custom to hunt. I grew up with horses and ponies, dogs, foxes and pheasants.

My father bred pheasants that were then let out to be killed, like hundreds of them a year for many years. Our dogs were trained to fetch pheasants. There is nothing wrong with it at all been done for centuries.

My grandparents similarly used to hunt yet be a doctor at the same time. Brought up with it, I am afraid to say and ate my first wood pigeon for years the other month and was quite tasty. That similarly too had been shot as had most of the menu at the restaurant in York.

It is one of the best ways to control foxes and also the spread of disease like badgers who spread TB.

Very few of the foxes were ever killed, rather like the survival of the fittest.

Go and enjoy yourself on horseback for a day and enjoy the thrill of the chase (that is if you don't get thrown off the horse!).

I suspect those that have been convicted of the said fellon would consider it a big joke that they have been convicted.

It also brings business to this area and including tourism and jobs that wouldn't be there.

baileyuk wrote:
the mounted section comes from west yorks, however they are often within the north yorks area either on operations or training...

please take note police do attend some hunts and no arrests have EVER been made by them..

baileyuk wrote:
yes agree arrests have been made under the act however none of the arrests have been made in the local areas and i dont think any of those prosecuted had any form of membership to countryside alliance or any hunt...

and if its such an effective way of stopping cruelty why isnt it used in halal slaughterhouses?

Woody Mellor wrote:

Digeorge wrote:
Woody Mellor

57 convictions making a total of 145 on the site

And on that said site, notable landowners, horse racing and Sirs and Fat Lady were convicted.

Difficulty in getting convictions because of Schedule 1. Read it!

So you are a vegetarian then?

I dont understand any of that! Apart from your question.

The answer is I'm a full on meat eating carnivore. Also, I like my steak rare, I wear leather, I dont hug trees and I'm born and bred a country lad who followed hunts as a child. Thankfully, I grew up!

GoodDoc wrote:

Woody Mellor wrote:

Digeorge wrote:
Woody Mellor

57 convictions making a total of 145 on the site

And on that said site, notable landowners, horse racing and Sirs and Fat Lady were convicted.

Difficulty in getting convictions because of Schedule 1. Read it!

So you are a vegetarian then?

I dont understand any of that! Apart from your question.

The answer is I'm a full on meat eating carnivore. Also, I like my steak rare, I wear leather, I dont hug trees and I'm born and bred a country lad who followed hunts as a child. Thankfully, I grew up!

(read as)..
"I am a hypocrite, who is more than willing to sacrifice the desires of others in pursuit of the moral highground. I defend my right to support the mass, barbaric exploitation of animals if it fills MY belly and covers MY feet, but if I can't see the rationale of hunters who cause far less suffering, well by Jove they should all stop it this second. Oh, and they're posh."
.
The biggest and perhaps most enduring argument against hunting is that of possible cruelty. Unfortunately, anyone with any significant knowledge about how meat products end up on our plates realises that a few foxes pale to insiginificance. And no, no one is forced to eat meat. The analogy stands - it's just you favour your reason to cause suffering over theirs.

ryedale.man wrote:
Could it be the thrill of the chase @lostshoe rather than the rare possibility of actually seeing a fox killed?

baileyuk wrote:
the topic was about fox hunting and the support,, however it turned into a slanging match when twotone started to insult people,, again the anti hunt brigade cannot see this and its the hunters to blame.. you cannot even agree on a stereotype of the hunter, some say we are well off toffee nosed educated snobs yet some say we are thick with poor spelling punctuation maths ect..

the folk who don,t like hunting which is their decision, i just ask for them to make a decision based on attending a hunt and seeing what actually does happen insted of listening to antihunt brigade or the media... why do you think the press print stories about hunting?

everyone mentions its cruel however I have used halal meat as an example of worse cruelty in terms of the numbers of animals suffering,, halal and similar operate 24/7 12 months of the year fox hunting operates a fraction of this and prior to the ban the fox had a fighting chance,, but again i ask why these types of animal cruelty are being ignored?

CountrysideOne wrote:

baileyuk wrote: the topic was about fox hunting and the support,, however it turned into a slanging match when twotone started to insult people,, again the anti hunt brigade cannot see this and its the hunters to blame.. you cannot even agree on a stereotype of the hunter, some say we are well off toffee nosed educated snobs yet some say we are thick with poor spelling punctuation maths ect.. the folk who don,t like hunting which is their decision, i just ask for them to make a decision based on attending a hunt and seeing what actually does happen insted of listening to antihunt brigade or the media... why do you think the press print stories about hunting? everyone mentions its cruel however I have used halal meat as an example of worse cruelty in terms of the numbers of animals suffering,, halal and similar operate 24/7 12 months of the year fox hunting operates a fraction of this and prior to the ban the fox had a fighting chance,, but again i ask why these types of animal cruelty are being ignored?

First off many anti hunt folk have very real experience of hunting. I'm country born, bred and living. The nearest city to me is over 30 miles away, I'm not a 'townie' so stop trying to portray all decent humans with compassion and respect for animals as 'townies' (a word that is as offensive as bumpkin anyway). The meat argument is pathetic and seemingly desperate. I personally don't eat meat but some people do and those people are slowly making more informed choices about how their meat is produced, slaughtered etc. The quote of 'why these types of animal cruelty are being ignored?' is just plain silly. There have been enormous strides in animal welfare is recent years. Look at the success of Hugh Fearnley Wittingstall chicken and fish campaigns, that doesn't happen without people being concerned over animal welfare. Just because some one chooses to eat meat doesn't remove their right to question the ethics of hunting. Sooner (rather than later please) the hunting fraternity accept that the this practice is in the past the better. Why not work with hunt monitors? Why not pronounce your hunt as 'kill free'? Surely that's what decent law abiding people should do.

twotonethomas wrote:

GoodDoc wrote:

Woody Mellor wrote:

Digeorge wrote:
Woody Mellor

57 convictions making a total of 145 on the site

And on that said site, notable landowners, horse racing and Sirs and Fat Lady were convicted.

Difficulty in getting convictions because of Schedule 1. Read it!

So you are a vegetarian then?

I dont understand any of that! Apart from your question.

The answer is I'm a full on meat eating carnivore. Also, I like my steak rare, I wear leather, I dont hug trees and I'm born and bred a country lad who followed hunts as a child. Thankfully, I grew up!

(read as)..
"I am a hypocrite, who is more than willing to sacrifice the desires of others in pursuit of the moral highground. I defend my right to support the mass, barbaric exploitation of animals if it fills MY belly and covers MY feet, but if I can't see the rationale of hunters who cause far less suffering, well by Jove they should all stop it this second. Oh, and they're posh."
.
The biggest and perhaps most enduring argument against hunting is that of possible cruelty. Unfortunately, anyone with any significant knowledge about how meat products end up on our plates realises that a few foxes pale to insiginificance. And no, no one is forced to eat meat. The analogy stands - it's just you favour your reason to cause suffering over theirs.

So where do you stand on badger baiting, dog fighting, **** fighting etc etc?

Woody Mellor wrote:

twotonethomas wrote:

GoodDoc wrote:

Woody Mellor wrote:

Digeorge wrote:
Woody Mellor

57 convictions making a total of 145 on the site

And on that said site, notable landowners, horse racing and Sirs and Fat Lady were convicted.

Difficulty in getting convictions because of Schedule 1. Read it!

So you are a vegetarian then?

I dont understand any of that! Apart from your question.

The answer is I'm a full on meat eating carnivore. Also, I like my steak rare, I wear leather, I dont hug trees and I'm born and bred a country lad who followed hunts as a child. Thankfully, I grew up!

(read as)..
"I am a hypocrite, who is more than willing to sacrifice the desires of others in pursuit of the moral highground. I defend my right to support the mass, barbaric exploitation of animals if it fills MY belly and covers MY feet, but if I can't see the rationale of hunters who cause far less suffering, well by Jove they should all stop it this second. Oh, and they're posh."
.
The biggest and perhaps most enduring argument against hunting is that of possible cruelty. Unfortunately, anyone with any significant knowledge about how meat products end up on our plates realises that a few foxes pale to insiginificance. And no, no one is forced to eat meat. The analogy stands - it's just you favour your reason to cause suffering over theirs.

So where do you stand on badger baiting, dog fighting, **** fighting etc etc?

@twotonethomas. My advice is dont reply to, or even read GoodDocs drivel. I stopped a long time back, he just pops up on every fox hunting article spouting ill informed nonsense.

baileyuk wrote:
how do you know its illinformed nonsense if as you say you don,t read it,, and then because it does,nt agree with you its classed as drivel and you ask others not to read it,, surely the basis of any debate is to read both sides.. or is it another try at censorship?

Hunting4olympics wrote:
alfie, as you clearly are very special, please do show me how the derwent hunt ripped apart a fox over the festive period.

Also, i do hope you didnt eat turkey for christmas I would hate for you to rip apart an animal for your eating hobby.

TheTruthHurts wrote:
Having read through most of these comments I have to say im more against hunting than for. ' I dont like reading excuses like the dogs kill better than a gun as that is just not true you would expect most farmers to be competent enough marksmen. ' Also what intrests me are the comments along the line of 'its the thrill of the chase' etc If the thrill is in terrorising a helpless animal then deep down what sort of person are you?

FulfordFreeThinker wrote:
baileyuk My reason for asking questions earlier was to determine whether or not hunting is indeed an effective means of pest control. The answers you have given indicate that it is not. It's hard to imagine a small number of foxes in poor health causing serious problems to lambs or chickens. If foxes are pests then I agree that they should be controlled but I must say that this looks more like an excuse for hunting than a reason. I have absolutely no objection to people charging around the countryside on horseback - it looks a lot of fun. However, I can't understand why a scent trail or something similar can't be followed. I also agree with previous comments saying that criticism of the meat industry is irrelevant. I don't think many people who are against fox hunting would try and claim that it is the only example of animal cruelty but it is true that it is a separate issue entirely. Your specific problem with halal meat is also a little odd - how much do you actually know about the industry?

twotonethomas wrote:
Baileyuk, have you worked in a halal slaughterhouse?

thelostshoe1977 wrote:
sounds like its more of a race issue baileyuk has. although i am neither pro nor anti hunt i still haven't read one justifyable reason to hunt foxes in this way, and i would think a lot more of the person who would just admit that they enjoy killing animals in this way. at least they are being honest.

thelostshoe1977 wrote:
i have made no attempts to insult just a rather tongue in cheek comment because of the number of times halal has been brought up as an example. i dont think it is a fair comparison though as one is the slaughter of animals for the purpose of food following strict religious guidelines (this does not excuse it) and the other is the slaughter of animals for fun

SophieMThompson wrote:
Ok so Hunting was banned, but there are so many loop holes in the law it is almost impossible for any arrests to be made. You are talking about how police officers should be making arrests but surely their time would be better spent fighting worse crimes such as rape and murder. Does Hunting directly affect you? If not, leave it be, it's nothing to do with you at the end of the day.
And as far as Hunting being undertaken by 'toffs' I really think you should get to know the people you think you are talking about. Don't judge a book by its cover.
At the end of the day, don't you all have better things to argue about other than an act that was passed several years ago. Those that want to Hunt, will Hunt. Those that don't, won't.

alfie wrote:

SophieMThompson wrote: Ok so Hunting was banned, but there are so many loop holes in the law it is almost impossible for any arrests to be made. You are talking about how police officers should be making arrests but surely their time would be better spent fighting worse crimes such as rape and murder. Does Hunting directly affect you? If not, leave it be, it's nothing to do with you at the end of the day. And as far as Hunting being undertaken by 'toffs' I really think you should get to know the people you think you are talking about. Don't judge a book by its cover. At the end of the day, don't you all have better things to argue about other than an act that was passed several years ago. Those that want to Hunt, will Hunt. Those that don't, won't.

Sophie yes there may be crimes which are worse such as the rape and murder of humans but we all have different things we feel passionate about you can't concentrate on every one of life's horrors. A large group of peoples concern lies with animal rights because animals don't have a voice.

baileyuk wrote:

alfie wrote:

SophieMThompson wrote: Ok so Hunting was banned, but there are so many loop holes in the law it is almost impossible for any arrests to be made. You are talking about how police officers should be making arrests but surely their time would be better spent fighting worse crimes such as rape and murder. Does Hunting directly affect you? If not, leave it be, it's nothing to do with you at the end of the day. And as far as Hunting being undertaken by 'toffs' I really think you should get to know the people you think you are talking about. Don't judge a book by its cover. At the end of the day, don't you all have better things to argue about other than an act that was passed several years ago. Those that want to Hunt, will Hunt. Those that don't, won't.

Sophie yes there may be crimes which are worse such as the rape and murder of humans but we all have different things we feel passionate about you can't concentrate on every one of life's horrors. A large group of peoples concern lies with animal rights because animals don't have a voice.

i agree with Sophie,s comment.. and yes agree that the hunt and the anti hunt will never agree,, but the statement animal rights is very selective.. if you are for animal rights then surely every animal is your concern?

the comments from anti hunt on here saying this goes on that goes on but have never attended a hunt or if they have it as been years ago,, those that hunt are out and can be easily found, but none of the antihunt turn up, but feel they can comment from their armchairs quoting articles from the internet or press..

and the one thing about toffs as you call it alfie, is the ones i know also have a sniffling little boy called Alfie!

baileyuk wrote:
sorry alfie don,t quite see where i,m being offensive?

i,m going on the above comments where it states that some have never been on a hunt and feel they don,t want to,, which is fine and this was after my request to attend and make a decision, which was declined and again i, fine with that,, others have said they went years ago with family but again did,nt like it or whatever again fine with me,, I have also said that hunting moved on as well as everything else and things portrayed by media is again what happened years ago..

I also stated that some friends of mine, both poorly paid farmers labourer and stable hand have a son called Alfie,, but these people seem to fit in what you call a toff, i,m not quite sure how a couple living in a rented 2up2down, bothworking 7 days a week to make ends meet fit into this sterotype but hayhho?

but either way through out the topic I have tried to get a clarification on what you call animal cruelty? I have answered questions asked of me, i have invited people to come and see for themselves what happens on a hunt,, yet in reply i have been called racist/a liar/atoff, thick stupid ect..

huntsman come from all backgrounds, i myself come from a black country council estate, only attended state school, joined forces, and learned a trade, just like many many hunters..

pimms is so old scholl btw, especially as they started to serve it in wetherspoons,, lol i,m more of a stay at home pie n chip man and a bottle of real ale,, leave you to guess what goes in the pie! but not exactly the description you give of a huntsman..

SophieMThompson wrote:
Ok so Hunting was banned, but there are so many loop holes in the law it is almost impossible for any arrests to be made. You are talking about how police officers should be making arrests but surely their time would be better spent fighting worse crimes such as rape and murder. Does Hunting directly affect you? If not, leave it be, it's nothing to do with you at the end of the day.
And as far as Hunting being undertaken by 'toffs' I really think you should get to know the people you think you are talking about. Don't judge a book by its cover.
At the end of the day, don't you all have better things to argue about other than an act that was passed several years ago. Those that want to Hunt, will Hunt. Those that don't, won't.

twotonethomas wrote:

SophieMThompson wrote:
Ok so Hunting was banned, but there are so many loop holes in the law it is almost impossible for any arrests to be made. You are talking about how police officers should be making arrests but surely their time would be better spent fighting worse crimes such as rape and murder. Does Hunting directly affect you? If not, leave it be, it's nothing to do with you at the end of the day.
And as far as Hunting being undertaken by 'toffs' I really think you should get to know the people you think you are talking about. Don't judge a book by its cover.
At the end of the day, don't you all have better things to argue about other than an act that was passed several years ago. Those that want to Hunt, will Hunt. Those that don't, won't.

Wow Sophie what a selfish little world you would have us live in.
Hunger doesn't directly affect me so I shouldn't worry my head about kids starving to death.
I've never been raped so attacks on women shouldn't bother me.
Wasn't abused as a child so hey ho what goes on in Catholic children's homes isn't, I suppose, something I should fret about.
Keep it up Sophie you are showing the true values of the bloodsports fanatics.

GoodDoc wrote:
Sophie, I'm afraid you're most likely wasting your time. You're trying to educate people with experience and logic. These people are only concerned with second-hand emotion, and no amount of factual evidence is going to persuade them otherwise. Some people are far to happy to point the finger rather than investigating their own impact on animal welfare.
.
To be honest, I don't think anyone has credible right to object to it unless firstly they have seen a hunt and know the truth of what goes on and who partakes, and secondly, they are staunchly vegan and do everything in their power to protect all living things - not just the cute ones that we hear about.
.
As it stands, it seems that the anti-movement here is still overloaded with obnoxious well-to-do Yorkies complaining about toffs (!) and speaking about some abstract idea of what hunting is. That is the level of opposition, and that is why hunting has got a bright future.

baileyuk wrote:
alfie, your a chicken farmer or a smallholder, the money you earn to feed/clothe yourself ect comes from the stock you breed/sell produce form ect.. a fox comes along and destroys your stock leaving you with nothing to eat/or earn money from and majority of cases no insurance or reimbursement from anyone or society..
what would you do?

i do in someway understand where you comefrom as well as others but it is very selective, as a whole its being against cruelty to animals but not all of them.

baileyuk wrote:
but are,nt vermin animals? are household pests animals? is testing on animals cruel? there are 3 animal test labs in york of what I know of,.

I,m also a fisherman if I catch zander or maybe certain crabfish advise is to kill them,, is this cruel as to catch them you have to hunt them.

the countryside today is managed with wildlife and hunting in mind, the estimate is that 5 million pheasants are bred and released each year for the sole purpose of being hunted and shot.. the hedgerow on farm land being managed to protect, take away the country sport and you will have no hedgerows..

I cannot understand how you can choose certain animals when it comes to animal cruelty. Ive mentioned several other cases of animals being subjected to pain ect from halal to even slugs which are poisoned, but all these are ok because the average person eats meat, dislikes vermin, dislikes household pests and can,t be bothered to use other protection on their gardens..

the money hunting generates goes back into the country,, its does cost alot of money which is where the toffs insults come in.. however take it all away and see what you will be left with..

a cat goes and hunts and treats it prey in the same way,, are we going to control cats now by having them on a leash ect,

MrChuckles wrote:
It's merely status seeking by people who want to display some form of power.
"A great day was had by all" well this is disturbing. I can not understand how chasing an animal to the point of exhaustion so it can not defend itself. Then taking enjoyment in watching the animal become dismembered while suffering a slow and painful death at the jaws of a pack of hounds employed and trained to do the dirty work (wouldn't want blood on the expensive threads now).
It's outdated, as are many traditions that were once seen as acceptable but no longer have a place in a civilised society.
If an animals a pest in an extreme situation, have some class, respect and dispatch it with some credability and skill.. not as a part of a display of status seeking and wannabe authority.