Hunting Pigs with Swords

[Finman]

Hi Finman I respect your views but I do disagree.

 

We can go back and forth and I’m sure I won’t convince you and likewise, you won’t convince me.

 

Let’s agree to disagree.

 

ATB

 

I don't feel that either of us need to convince each other about anything. I respect the fact that this type of hunting doesn't agree with you, what I struggle with is that you characterised it as 'cruel'. With this in mind, every type of hunting which includes dogs flushing and pursuing game (wild boar and hare in many places in the world, roe in some countries), should also be branded 'cruel'. Fox hunting too.

From the point of view of supporting field sports, giving characterisations to some of them that only fuel the anti-hunting, bunnyhuggers ourselves, will eventually come back to bite us all....

 

best wishes,

 

Finman

[sonic]

 

Something for discussion.

 

Is it legal in the UK ?

I'm not going to go into the morals of this practice. But I believe that as shown on the film it would come under the hunting act and be illegal.Not more than two dogs flushed to a gun. there may be a legal way to do it but I wouldn't want to be the one in the dock.

[achosenman]

I commented about cruelty before watching the video. I never watched because I know what using dogs entails and I don’t find that spectacle pleasant in the least. In fact I would be happier to shoot the dogs then shoot the pig, but that’s just me. However I have just watched it.

 

It does not involve driving a pig with dogs as you euphemistically put it, it involves two dogs wearing protective kit savaging a pig until the humans catch up and stab it with a sword. So yes, cruel, and completely and utterly unnecessary is an apt description.

 

As for the utter tosh about a knife blow being less painful than a bullet...again complete rubbish. No-one on this forum has been killed with a knife and a bullet and then reported back to the rest of us on what was the least painful. So to claim knowledge about this is nothing more than fanciful thinking. Just for the record I have been stabbed and got the scar to prove it, and for the record it was bloody painful.

 

Using a dog is justified in some circumstances to prevent further suffering. So yes a wounded deer being tracked and held by a trained dog until it is killed is IMO sometimes a necessary evil to prevent prolonged suffering. It is however a last resort, not a normal method for hunting.

 

I have never subscribed to the theory that my enemies’ enemy is my friend. I have ridden to hounds as a youngster and have seen first hand what a pack does to a fox. I tend to agree that for this day and age it is unacceptably cruel and unjustifiable in the modern day. That’s why it was outlawed.

 

What is lawful in other countries is largely irrelevant. There are many overseas customs and practises that are illegal in the UK and long may it continue.

 

ATB

[Finman]

hmmmm...as you said, we are not going to agree.... I'll just highlight a point though, for the sake of correctness: The dogs were used to locate the quarry. I don't understand how's that different to 'driving' unless we should see a tweed clad gentleman on a highseat waiting for said quarry. No dogs, no pig in their case.

 

I have never been stabbed by anyone else other than myself, I have the scar also to prove it. It was bloody painful indeed. Nevertheless, the pigs I stabbed died much faster than some of the deer that I've shot (and not in the guts, I hasten to add). Each to their own, I guess...

 

best regards,

 

Finman

[achosenman]

That’s the point “driving” is to cause an animal to move in the desired direction. A driven boar hunt drives the animals in front of the guns so they may be shot. The idea is not that the dogs savage the game animals.

 

The dogs in the video hunted and set upon the pig in question...ergo they were not driving anything anywhere. Just doing what any dog does to its prey. The humans merely did what all opportunistic scavengers do and stepped in after the hard work was done and then in this case, stabbed the otherwise engaged beast and took the credit.

 

ATB

[Finman]

That’s the point “driving” is to cause an animal to move in the desired direction. A driven boar hunt drives the animals in front of the guns so they may be shot. The idea is not that the dogs savage the game animals.

 

The dogs in the video hunted and set upon the pig in question...ergo they were not driving anything anywhere. Just doing what any dog does to its prey. The humans merely did what all opportunistic scavengers do and stepped in after the hard work was done and then in this case, stabbed the otherwise engaged beast and took the credit.

 

ATB

 

We may be playing with semantics here, but, had the dogs that are involved in 'driving' caught up with the quary they are driving, what would happen? We are using the dogs' natural hunting instinct to chase the animals, and we intercept the dogs' hunt with a rifle. Had the rifle not been there in a driving situation, what would the outcome be? There are numerous examples of driven boar hunting where the dogs catch up with the boar and they bay it and try to bite it, whilst someone comes from behind the dogs with a rifle/shotgun and finishes the job. Where's the difference?

 

as we said...we're not going to agree.

 

best wishes,

 

Finman

[achosenman]

A dog that is driving game is under control at all times. The handler will range the animal out, or close in, depending how the game is behaving. The dog can be called off at any time. If a dog runs on and catches game it is not driving, but rather hunting and that is the mark of a poorly trained dog or poor handler.

 

The intentional setting of a dog onto another animal is cruel by today’s standards. The use of a dog’s instinct to drive game is not. The death of any game animal should be as painless as we hunters can possibly make it. Having a dog tear chunks out of another animal so that you can stab it fails that standard at every point.

 

ATB

[Missed]

It is interesting just what one takes from a post. What I alluded to was the difference in pain from being stabbed and being shot; not being shot to death! Whilst I understand that different people have very different tolerances to pain I can tell you from personal experience that being stabbed hurt a lot less than being shot. Many years ago I was stabbed and was unaware that a blade had been used, in fact it was another individual who noticed the blood. The sensation was just of a hard punch. In later life I had the misfortune of getting HV GSW's. The deep burning sensation from the shots was in marked contrast to the stabbing. A good friend who used to be in the UDR was ambushed and had three different natures of ammo cause six GSW's. The one that caused him most pain was the 5.56 that grazed his thigh, but in his own words they all burned like buggery.

 

I bowhunt. Now that sport is also banned in this Country because well meaning but naive people though that it was inhumane in comparison to shooting. You may not like my sport, however it is the division between disciplines that the antis take advantage of. Today your stalking may be safe, but for how long?

 

All the pig hunts that I have participated in have involved dogs. It is interesting that you believe all such hunts involve the dogs doing all the hard work (ripping chunks off the beast?) and us humans only arriving to stick the knife in, not true in my experience. The dogs will bring the pig to bay but you still have to wade in and kill it.

 

Like I said before, it is not everyone’s cup of tea but it is exhilarating sport in its own right. Each to their own.

[Finman]

A dog that is driving game is under control at all times. The handler will range the animal out, or close in, depending how the game is behaving. The dog can be called off at any time. If a dog runs on and catches game it is not driving, but rather hunting and that is the mark of a poorly trained dog or poor handler.

 

The intentional setting of a dog onto another animal is cruel by today’s standards. The use of a dog’s instinct to drive game is not. The death of any game animal should be as painless as we hunters can possibly make it. Having a dog tear chunks out of another animal so that you can stab it fails that standard at every point.

 

ATB

 

My friend, with the greatest respect, I have a feeling that you may have an idealistic view of driven hunts...many a time the dogs will be well out of range of control, and their handlers are competent and the dogs are spectacular...Missed said it very well, the dogs usually bay the pig and the human is he who has to do the killing. The pig has to be rather small for the dogs to be able to inflict any damage.

 

Missed: +1

 

Best wishes,

 

Finman

[achosenman]

Yep I’ve been around on active service long enough to understand GSW up close and personal too. The graze from the 5.56 hurting more is very understandable since there are more nerve endings closer the skins surface than deep down.

 

I believe you are mistaken about what the future may hold. Vermin control will always need to be done, as will deer management. What will change is what is considered as a humane method. Your bow, the fox hounds etc were all superseded by a technology that gave rise to far higher level of humaneness and effectiveness. That is why they were outlawed.

 

Deer will still need to be culled in the future, especially if to do otherwise would incur a cost. We might be using ray guns, but they will be culled to control the numbers.

 

ATB

[baldie]

Achosenman.....

 

You,ve never had to finish a wounded deer with a knife then ?

[achosenman]

Achosenman.....

 

You,ve never had to finish a wounded deer with a knife then ?

No. I have only ever needed to bleed them after shooting.

 

ATB

[achosenman]

My friend, with the greatest respect, I have a feeling that you may have an idealistic view of driven hunts...many a time the dogs will be well out of range of control, and their handlers are competent and the dogs are spectacular...Missed said it very well, the dogs usually bay the pig and the human is he who has to do the killing. The pig has to be rather small for the dogs to be able to inflict any damage. Missed: +1 Best wishes, Finman

I do not have any idealist views of a driven hunt. I think hunting like that is quite frankly stupid and plays into the hands of the antis. Those that practice that sport will see it banned simply because they cannot understand the majority view has changed over the years.

 

There is an innate sense of right and wrong in most people. Unnecessary cruelty is not tolerated these days. That does not mean people are stupid and don't understand the need to control numbers. It means that they don't want to see it and if they do, they don't want to see something screaming while dogs go at it until some idiot stabs it with a sword.

 

As I said at the start, lets agree to disagree and end this here.

 

ATB

[sonic]

Unfortunately you're wrong the hunting act was brought in not for welfare reasons but as an attack on what Labour saw as the upper class. studies by the middle way group which recommended licensing hunts and strict codes of practice contradicts your statement it was because it was cruel.

Don't be fooled if the anti's had their way there would be no shooting vermin control game or any other live animal.

And if they get their wish then non military or police use of firearms would be next on their agenda.

If we are not careful it will happen piece by piece.

[achosenman]

That may be your take on it and that may have been the lefties true reason, no one will ever prove anything one way or another. The reason the majority of the UK population went along with it was that it was perceived as archaic and cruel. They cared nothing for the politics.

 

I will not stand and defend the indefensible just because the antis might be coming after me next. I'd bet a pound to a pinch of salt that those that were prevented from stabbing pigs for fun would start using a more humane method without missing a heartbeat.

 

ATB

[kent]

I know many don't like it but what you witness is a lot cleaner than many forms of killing that you might except as ok. Also consider how a pack of predators or a single large predator might kill the pig, it wont be as quick as the knife! Correctly used the knife is very quick, I the wrong hands however.............

I still think the English presenter is a plank. Guns are unacceptable in these circumstances and the huntsman clearly explains why they use dogs, its not our place to criticise. All stalkers should know how to use a knife but I recon only a small fraction do and there are laws surrounding the use of dogs on follow up of wounded deer also in the UK.

have always believed if you cannot kill by hand you shouldn't hunt with a gun because sooner or later..............

[sonic]

it was not voted in by a majority Labour used the parliament act. It was not done by due process.

And public surveys can be made to pretty much say what the author wants How does it go "lies damned lies and statistics"

The firearms act came about because the then Government was scared that that they could end up with a revolution. Like the russian one. None of the amendments have solved the problems they were supposedly meant to. Take Scotland and airguns for example.

It may not appear nice to see but emotive arguments without solid scientific backing that something is cruel does none of use any good.

I take it you are a meat eater. are you aware that every four legged animal slaughtered for human consumption is killed with a knife.

[Finman]

I do not have any idealist views of a driven hunt. I think hunting like that is quite frankly stupid and plays into the hands of the antis. Those that practice that sport will see it banned simply because they cannot understand the majority view has changed over the years.

 

There is an innate sense of right and wrong in most people. Unnecessary cruelty is not tolerated these days. That does not mean people are stupid and don't understand the need to control numbers. It means that they don't want to see it and if they do, they don't want to see something screaming while dogs go at it until some idiot stabs it with a sword.

 

As I said at the start, lets agree to disagree and end this here.

 

ATB

 

my friend, your message in this response and your pennultimate one, allienates a number of people who do ratting with terriers, send terriers into earths to dispatch cubs and any other legitimate activity which entails using a dog to do vermin work. Even when that means sending a robust GWP to stop and kill an injured deer. And lets not even start on snares...

 

What the sanitised urban dwelling majority, who thinks that meat comes from a packet, wishes to see and what nature and the countryside regards as acceptable are two different things in many cases. I have yet to meet a hunter/stalker/terrier man/ferret man wishing for any of the animals he pursues to suffer. Still, the methods he uses to dispatch them may look cruel to the 'highly educated, civilised' townie. And that does not stop at the field of hunting/vermin control, it spreads to other areas such as research, but this is another can of worms...

 

Neither of this group is wrong. What is, in my view, wrong, is one group to dictate to the other what they should and should not do, purely on the strength of impression. And lets not forget: if we, who purport to enjoy the countryside and engage in fieldsports, are scathing in our view of some of the coutnrysports, there may come a time when we will need them to support what we do. Because, once they are gone, due to the popular belief of cruelty, there will be another field sport in line to take the place of the one just banned, in the sights of those who will delight to see all countrysports banned....Exploding rabbits, evaporated crows etc, are to many a folk uneccesarily cruel lets not forget....

 

best regards,

 

Finman

[benny243]

I like the picture on the cover of a big European boar when what he actually used a sword to kill was a feral pig, if that was a big boar in Germany he would be asking realtree to send him some new kit minus the legs, I don't dislike anybody I havnt met (apart from ken Livingston) but all his articals iv read in the sporting rifle should read at the top of the page "advertisement feature" he cant string a sentence together without mentioning his ruger rifle topped off with whatever scope hes been sent that week and not forgetting realtree everyother word. it would be easy to put any dislike for the bloke down to jealousy but im afraid if you write articals that people are paying to read they should be informative i.e written by the professional in front not the bloke walking behind him.

[kent]

I like the picture on the cover of a big European boar when what he actually used a sword to kill was a feral pig, if that was a big boar in Germany he would be asking realtree to send him some new kit minus the legs, I don't dislike anybody I havnt met (apart from ken Livingston) but all his articals iv read in the sporting rifle should read at the top of the page "advertisement feature" he cant string a sentence together without mentioning his ruger rifle topped off with whatever scope hes been sent that week and not forgetting realtree everyother word. it would be easy to put any dislike for the bloke down to jealousy but im afraid if you write articals that people are paying to read they should be informative i.e written by the professional in front not the bloke walking behind him.

I agree with your comments about articles that should and used to be listed as "advertorial" , the unfortunate thing is no printed magazine can support its print, distribution and retailers margin without this junk. Now some could argue about the lack of sales and justifiable yet profitable cover prices is a direct result of the rubbish written within the fold and the amount of space given to pure adverts, unfortunately I fear it has more to do with the steadily diminishing intellect of the reader over the last few decades- this changing face of the British intellect also impacts with the writers. I cannot think of any real great writers that seemed quite common in the past. In the case of this film the presenter certainly detracted from the professional hunters involved, from whom I should have personally liked to hear more

[achosenman]

it was not voted in by a majority Labour used the parliament act. It was not done by due process.

Are you saying that the law is unlawfully enacted? Strange why the present government has declined to repeal it, perhaps they know something you don’t.

 

 

my friend, your message in this response and your pennultimate one, allienates a number of people who do ratting with terriers, send terriers into earths to dispatch cubs and any other legitimate activity which entails using a dog to do vermin work.

Why? I have not said all dog work in not necessary. You have even used the word “legitimate” the situation in the video we are discussing is done through preference not because they can’t kill the pig in a more humane way. I even gave an example why it was a necessary to end suffering with a dog when one of us hunters has stuffed up.

 

Terriers are used when there is not a viable alternative and my experience of those in action is that death is instant for the rat. Not the same situation in the video, is it?

 

 

All stalkers should know how to use a knife but I recon only a small fraction do and there are laws surrounding the use of dogs on follow up of wounded deer also in the UK.

have always believed if you cannot kill by hand you shouldn't hunt with a gun because sooner or later..............

I do know how to use a knife. I have not needed to, my bullets do the work.

 

I take it you are a meat eater. are you aware that every four legged animal slaughtered for human consumption is killed with a knife.

I am aware, and have seen the inside of a slaughter house. I was raised on a sheep farm. I used to take the lambs to slaughter. But you are being very selective with your description. They do have their throats cut...but after being stunned first. I did not see any dogs tearing chunks out of them prior to this. Are you saying that that happens normally?

 

ATB

[brown dog]

Chaps,

 

 

 

Do you think it may be time to draw a line under this thread?

[kip270]

Well said BD

[achosenman]

Yes BD I do.

 

ATB

[sonic]

Are you saying that the law is unlawfully enacted? Strange why the present government has declined to repeal it, perhaps they know something you don’t.

 

 

 

I do know how to use a knife. I have not needed to, my bullets do the work.

 

 

 

I am aware, and have seen the inside of a slaughter house. I was raised on a sheep farm. I used to take the lambs to slaughter. But you are being very selective with your description. They do have their throats cut...but after being stunned first. I did not see any dogs tearing chunks out of them prior to this. Are you saying that that happens normally?

 

ATB

 

What I'm saying is the hunting act was not passed by due process ie; parliamentary majority and approved in the house of lords, Labour invoked the parliament act. There still is a very big question as to the legality of this but any party challenging said act would not then be able to use the same act if they ever wanted to so I doubt it will be challenged. The conservative party promised a free vote they still have time to make good on that promise in this parliament

 

 

you should know how to use a knife should there are many reasons why you may need to. not all deer drop on the spot and it may not always be safe to use a rifle to finish the job. when we farmed near Stocks reservoir I dealt with many car vs deer with a knife for the safety of the public and to ensure a quick clean finish where going for a gun or waiting for a vet would of been cruel. And de stressing for the tourists usually involved.

 

Stunned is not dead, and not every one is stunned Halal, kosher, failure of the stunning process. not every death in a slaughterhouse is the quick clean kill it should

be.

 

so you rounded sheep up (with or without dogs?) put them through the stress of handling them to sort which were fit to kill (letting the rest go only to repeat the process later) shoved them in a big box on wheels more stress and rattled them down x number of miles to the abattoir. before being man handled some more then the lucky ones are stunned and their throats cut.

 

See I can take a perfectly acceptable practice and make it appear cruel, And you could argue one side or the other till the cows come home and never agree.

 

The question was I believe is this legal here? the answer NO.

The morals of one form of hunting or another are subjective.

 

Most of the attacks against our sport are biased and emotive and not based on fact. semi auto rifles pistols fox hunting, the main weapon in all those bans going through was not fact but emotion.

 

I'm not saying you have to like or even want to hunt that way, but many predators hunt in a similar manner (without the knife of cause) are they cruel?