80% of rural Britain is AGAINST fox hunting – Pride’s Purge

A reminder: Nigel Farage might not be a Tory but he's another supporter of fox hunting - so might as well be, in this case. This speaks volumes about the other members of UKIP.

A reminder: Nigel Farage might not be a Tory but he’s another supporter of fox hunting – so might as well be, in this case. This speaks volumes about the other members of UKIP.

Further to Vox Political‘s article earlier today about the Tories’ plan for a vote on repealing the Hunting Act, here’s Tom Pride with an interesting and valuable statistic:

We’re constantly told the debate about hunting is a matter of rural opinion vs urban opinion.

Well not according to this opinion poll by IPSOS MORI.

According to their survey, exactly the same percentage of rural inhabitants – 80% – are against fox hunting as urban inhabitants – also 80%.

And even more surprisingly, slightly more people who live in the country (89% and 94%) are against hare coursing and badger baiting than townies (87% and 92%).

And if you thought most farmers supported the badger cull… well, you’ll have to read Tom’s article, won’t you?

Follow me on Twitter: @MidWalesMike

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
bringing you the best of the blogs.

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

17 thoughts on “80% of rural Britain is AGAINST fox hunting – Pride’s Purge

  1. Tony Dean

    Most of the people who live in rural areas these days are “white flighters” who know nothing about rural areas at all. So that opinion poll is worth precisely nothing.
    I would also point out that fox hunting is the only selective method of controlling foxes.
    Hounds will never kill a fit fox because they can’t catch one. Only unfit foxes predate on farm livestock because they are easy to catch.
    Since the ban I have not seen a fox because I suspect some very unsavoury methods have been used to exterminate every fox in the area.
    That is my only comment on the subject, I will only add as someone with a rural ancestry going back at least 1000 years, I would not urinate on either foxhunters or hunt saboteurs if they were on fire unless I could urinate petrol.
    It is a waste of time “having a go” at me about my comments, I am not interested.

      1. Steve Kind

        It is fascinating though, isn’t it that apparently the majority of people who live in rural areas apparently “don’t count” because they don’t have the correct ancestry. I suspect the poster would extend this argument happily to the bulk of the population. (I have absolutely no idea what a “white flighter” is. Must be hard to despise the people you live among.

      2. Mike Sivier Post author

        Of course, I live in a rural area, among rural people, and I don’t know any of them who’d be happy to know they don’t count.

    1. Florence

      1000 years? We can all claim that as before the Industrial Revolution this was an agrarian society, where 80% (or more) occupied landscape you seem to call “rural” now.

      In fact if you were to be honest 100% of us have “rural” (agrarian) ancestors going back 10,000 years to the development of agriculture.

      Not sure quite what your point is.

  2. Leslie Moore

    what a load of sh**e, defo just anti UKIP crap, there are loads of people pro hunting from all walks of life, I am pro hunting that does not make me a supporter of the Tory party, I am a supporter of freedom of choice, I am against townies and City dwellers telling me what to do, personally there are lots of things that go on in cities and towns that I`m against, but I think they have the right to lead their lives how they wish, I have seen what gambling has done to my friends and their families, I have seen what beer and shorts has done to individuals, what smoking tobacco has caused, but I don`t say ban it, and neither do you, or wish to stop the freedom of choice, I have seen what these things do to children, and married couples, get your heads sorted, freedom of choice not only that I see no harm in taking a nessessaty turning it into pleasure and creating some jobs on the way. I am not a UKIP voter, haven’t voted for 30 years because of views like this.

    1. Mike Sivier Post author

      So you’re not a UKIP voter but you want to register your displeasure at “anti UKIP crap”. Hmm.
      You’re pro-hunting but not a Tory – fine by me; I’m glad you make it clear that people other than Tories can be wrong-headed about this as well (yes I am adopting their language).
      If you are a supporter of freedom of choice, and are against “townies and City dwellers” telling you what to do, then what are you going to do about the fact that this article shows four-fifths of rural dwellers – people who live in the countryside – are against hunting?
      Your opinions on gambling, alcohol and tobacco are not relevant to this discussion (although some might say they are an argument against the freedom of choice you espouse as you mention “what these things do to children, and married couples”).
      I am left wondering why you seem to think the rest of us need to get our “heads sorted”.

  3. Tomy Dean

    To Steve Kind, a “white flighter” is someone who has moved away from a “multi-cultural idyll,” to a rural area. (Which mean they usually have a lot more money than local people do.)
    The WFs cause a lot of problems for local people where they move too because most of them have no idea how a rural area works.

  4. Leslie Moore

    My opinions on gambling tobacco ect, were to highlight real damage caused to individuals, to the family, and society in general, I don`t hear any call to ban those activities were fox hunting pales into insignificance were damage to humans are concerned. As for the poll finding they are to be taken with a pinch of salt, most people wouldn`t even bother to register their views on this subject as most just do not care, now I live in a semi rural mining village population circa 6500, I was born and raised here and there is no were near that figure opposed to hunting with dogs, unless of course most people in this village are wrong and you are right, in fact most are opposed to the current ban were lads cannot own and run lurchers ect without a helicopter and 6 police cars scouring the fields costing the taxpayer untold hard earned cash which would be better spent else were, I understand this is a emotive subject that is why I think people need to get their heads sorted and look at this subject as the individuals choice especially as there is far more cruelty in getting the pork, chicken and eggs to your plates which you all turn a blind eye to.

    1. Mike Sivier Post author

      Please don’t try to suggest this poll is anything to do with me; I didn’t run it and I didn’t respond to it – all I did was report it. Its result doesn’t suggest anyone is wrong or right; just the proportions that have particular points of view.

      1. Leslie Moore

        Mike I understand the poll was not your project or for that matter in line with your thinking, I didn`t mean to give the idea that the poll was anything to do with you and will apologise if that view has been mistakenly put forward. Les

      2. Mike Sivier Post author

        Cheers. It’s always a good idea to be as clear as possible with the way we write things because there’s usually someone out there who will choose to misinterpret it (I’ve found to my… irritation, let’s say).

  5. Thomas M

    I’m neutral on fox hunting. A fox once ate a pet rabbit of mine so I don’t like foxes but they don’t exactly deserve to be torn apart by dogs.

  6. Dave Rowlands

    The English country gentleman galloping after a fox – the unspeakable in full pursuit of the uneatable.

    (A Woman of No Importance, Oscars Wilde )

  7. Nick

    The kindness of a nation can be determined on how it treats its animals.
    How ANYBODY can take pleasure in seeing a fox ripped to pieces by 10 or more dogs, is totally beyond me. And yes, I’m a City person, but I’m also compassionate and it makes me feel sick that this is still happening. People who hunt foxes are cowards!!

  8. Les

    In what way are they cowards, just because they do not have the same point of view as yourself does not make them cowards, I would say plenty of fox hunters would not back off from a one to one fight with you, or from a aggressive attacker, or stand their ground if required, I don`t see fear in their eyes or behaviour, they are mainly good mannered and polite. Now as for 10 or more hounds killing a fox it is over with in a split second once it has been caught. A lot of people forget the countryside of today is not a natural habitat it is a controlled and cultivated and managed even the woodlands. The fox was the prey of the wolf however the wolf was eradicated so that has to be replaced to keep the balance, hounds are the next best thing just like the natural hunter of old only controlled not exterminated. Hope you recover from your sickness.

Comments are closed.