|
Hunting
with dogs could be banned under ‘world order’
FOX HUNTING with hounds would be banned if it was subject to
international standards on animal welfare, two experts said
yesterday at the Government's second day of hearings into the
future of the sport last week.
Only one out of eight experts called by the Government and representatives
of hunting bodies, anti-hunting campaigners and the Middle Way
to give evidence on the cruelty of hunting with dogs was wholly
supportive of hunting in all its forms. Of two supportive of
hunting, one was against deer hunting as currently practised.
Prof David Morton, Head of Biomedical Science and Ethics at
Birmingham university, told the hearing that welfare standards
prepared by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
for domesticated animals said that if something was likely to
cause suffering in humans it should be assumed it caused suffering
in animals.
Hunting caused fear if the animal's escape route was blocked
and pain and distress were part of the chase, he argued. These
were observable in the animal's behaviour, which was evidence
enough. Therefore, he argued, "avoidable suffering"
was involved.
The Rev Prof Andrew Linzey, research fellow in Theology and
Animals at Oxford, said the cruelty involved in hunting was
"morally indefensible" and "in a class of its
own".
He said: "There is something specially abhorrent about
causing suffering to sentient creatures. It is also potentially
socially harmful. Violence and abuse of animals may be linked
to other forms of abuse."
Prof Linzey went on to argue that he had seen evidence suggesting
a link between violence to animals and child abuse, domestic
violence and rape in American states where hunting took place.
Both he and Prof Morton agreed that hunting would be banned
if it was subject to the standards prepared by the OECD.
Lembit Opik, MP, of the Middle Way Group, asked Prof Morton
what he thought about competitive shooting and fishing. Prof
Morton gave a careful reply, saying he believed that it was
"morally problematic to go angling for sport." But
he said the intention of shooting was "to destroy almost
instantaneously."
Extreme anti-hunting campaigners have made no secret of the
fact that if hunting is banned they will push for similar bans
on angling and shooting.
Prof John Webster, head of animal husbandry at Bristol, said
man had a responsibility for minimising suffering to animals
but this extended beyond the method of control or killing itself,
to acts of neglect - for instance the suffering of shot and
wounded animals, or the causing of starvation to whole populations.
He said gassing or shooting would cause death in an animal typically
in 1 to 2 minutes, which was comparable to the suffering caused
in hunting. Sentient animals, such as foxes, learnt from experience
and most would escape the hunt more often than not, so it was
possible they were not unduly alarmed by the chase.
He was concerned, however, about the time some deer hunts took
- up to eight hours in some cases. "In my view, that is
longer than it should be," he said.
|
