|
Dear Editor,
I feel compelled to respond to the letters on Wednesday 12 March by Muriel Hayden and A. Herbert in relation to the hunting debate held in NUI, Galway on Wednesday 5 March.
Firstly, both letters stated that my Ph.D. research was based solely on UK figures and that I did not know how many foxes are actually in Ireland. I would like to restate to Mrs Hayden and A. Herbert that my research is entirely based on the economic and habitat conservation impacts of hunting in the Republic of Ireland and that there was no mention of any figures from the UK in this regard. I would also like to remind A. Herbert that the very small anti-hunting contingent present was instructed by the Chairman of the Literary and Debating Society that it was completely inappropriate to enter into any form of debate regarding the methodologies/research design of not only my own Ph.D. research but all other studies which were referred to during the debate. Personally however, I would welcome any discussion regarding my own research or indeed any other published research, especially on the subject of economic theory and modelling.
Secondly, neither I, nor any other government or non-government organisation dealing with wildlife issues in this country knows the exact population of foxes in Ireland. The fact that this question was put to me by Galway Green Party Cllr Niall Ó Brolcháin demonstrated an unfortunate lack of understanding by the Green Party in relation to wildlife.
The subject of fox control and animal welfare was a dominant feature throughout the debate. The most significant research conducted in relation to animal welfare and fox control was carried out in the UK prior to the ban on hunting with dogs in 2005. The research, which was undertaken by the Veterinary Association for Wildlife Management through the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons (2004), concluded that hunting with hounds is the most natural and humane method of controlling a fox population and that the kill, if it occurs, is almost instantaneous and above all certain. The pro-hunting lobby then questioned the very small anti-hunting contingent present if other methods of fox control such as shooting, snaring, trapping or poisoning were a more humane method of controlling foxes. This research was ignored by the UK Labour Party because the fox hunting ban in the UK was primarily concerned with a wider class issue rather than the welfare of the fox.
The third point made by A. Herbert and Mrs Hayden related to the pro-hunting argument that the majority of foxes, which are taken through hunting with hounds, are the sick, weak and old foxes and that the young fit animals get away. They don’t seem to realise that the older, weaker foxes are the most significant predators of livestock, predominately lambs as they represent easier prey in comparison to other wildlife species, such as ground-nesting birds or game.
Finally, Mrs Hayden, who admits to being totally opposed to hunting, concluded her letter by stating that all hunters are bullies. Without doubt, any debate on hunting ignites passion and sensitivity on either side of the argument. This was witnessed by both sides of the debate that Wednesday night in NUI, Galway. However, it was very evident from the 275 people who opposed the motion that hunting should be banned in Ireland were determined to show the Green Party how they feel about their policies on hunting. They not only demonstrated that they were unhappy with recent Green Party attempts to restrict game shooting, coursing and hunting with hounds, but more importantly, their policy which aims to completely ban hunting in Ireland and at EU level. The pro-hunting lobby stated that they will re-address the hunting debate at the next Government election.
Yours,
David Scallan,
Headford Road,
Galway
Comments () » |
 |
 |
