You have reached iGreens.org.uk. In December 2006 we moved to iGreens.org with faster servers and discussion boards. Click here to follow us.
|
You have reached iGreens.org.uk. In December 2006 we moved to iGreens.org with faster servers and discussion boards. Click here to follow us. |
A good ideaDear Jim, Sorry to hear
that the townies are set to ban fox hunting. I know it's been a long, long
battle to this point. While I certainly wouldn't advocate supporting
passage of this, I wonder if it might not be possible for hunt-supporting MPs to
insert language that would leave it open to resume hunting as soon as the damage
to the countryside and fox populations becomes evident. Evident happens a
long time before "publicly apparent". That would provide a
bit of insurance, should the bill succeed on this go-round. Yours Norman MacLeod, Oregon. Mr. MacLeod is a leader of the save the Klamath Basin Campaign. Click here for details. iGreen reply
I think this would be a good
tactical point. I suggest
that we ask our MPs to support an amendment, which would require the bill to
lapse if there was clear evidence that foxes were being harmed by the ban.
An independent organisation could keep track of fox numbers and the
number dying slow deaths from wounding.
The criterion for repeal would be a clear fall in total numbers AND a
rise in the numbers dying of man made injury.
If such an amendment passed it would provide a very useful safeguard.
If it failed it would be clear evidence that fox welfare is not the
reason for the ban, and provide a magnificent stick for beating the
projectionists. Jim Thornton |
|
You have reached iGreens.org.uk. In December 2006 we moved to iGreens.org with faster servers and discussion boards. Click here to follow us.
Send mail to enquiries@igreens.org.uk
with
questions or comments about this web site.
|