UK ban on fox hunting leads to ‘catastrophic decline’

UK ban on fox hunting leads to ‘catastrophic decline’
The UK red fox (Vulpes vulpes) is becoming extinct thanks to the good intentions of environmentalists and animal rights activists.| Photo courtesy of Bigstock/Qba

Every day, all over the world, good intentions cover many wrongs.

An observer from another planet can’t fail to notice that humans care more about intentions than consequences, and when consequences recede, we rarely reverse course. Wrong at first.

“God forbid the good-natured,” wrote novelist Vikram Seth in “A Perfect Boy” (Record, 2014).

This is not to suggest bad intentions, but to realize that good ones can be worse, depending on the results.

Recent victims of goodwill include Britain’s foxes (four-legged). Story by reporter Haley Dixon Published in the newspaper telegram Last week (9) revealed a “catastrophic decline” in fox numbers since the 2004 hunting ban. Red foxes are endangered, especially in some rural areas.

More than 100 vets from across the UK have signed a letter saying “advocates of the 2004 hunting ban never expected their efforts to protect foxes to lead to this catastrophic decline.” Oops!

Parliament debated for 700 hours before enacting the ban. That’s more time than the previous year’s deliberations over the invasion of Iraq. The then Prime Minister Tony Blair agreed, but six years later in his autobiography, he revealed that the Hunting Act 2004 was “one of the pieces of domestic legislation I regret most”. On a trip to Italy a few years after his acceptance, he met a hunter believed That ban was a mistake.

“She calmly and persuasively explained to me what they (fox hunting) did, the work involved, the social contribution of continuing the hunt and the social effect of banning it. .”

See also  More relief from action in the UK comes a month after "Independence Day"

Nearly 20 years after the ban came into force, and 13 years after Blair came to light, the ban is taking a terrible toll on fox populations.

What went wrong?

Activists and “armchair officials” in Parliament, it turns out, have not done any scientific research on the issue. Fox hunting is bad, it is better to give up fox hunting. Such virtue was sufficient to fulfill a law. But farmers, ranchers and landlords who were victimized by marauding foxes took action on their own. Dixon’s essay telegram In his latest letter, he quoted vets.

“The most brutal method of controlling fox numbers should be based on selecting weaker animals, reducing the chance of injury and preventing the abandonment of dependent young. Hunting with dogs It was much better at achieving this than today’s legal systems. Number of foxes killed in this hunting Limited and poaching has dispersed the surviving foxes in sensitive areas…two decades ago, this is sad. Discussions Fox hunting was largely driven by political instincts, and little consideration was given to the need for scientific research.”

In the United States, we have seen a similar effect with the Endangered Species Act of 1973. It’s called “throw it away, bury it, shut up” because of the law’s perverse incentives. John Stossel provides the details In this short but revealing video.

Therefore, before undertaking an action, no matter how passionately you may believe in its intrinsic virtue, it is always a great virtue to put your emotional motives aside for a moment and consider what the consequences will be. Truths may be inconvenient and humiliating, but they trump intentions every time. To reinforce the point, here are some additional tips:

“Without wisdom, all the good intentions in the world are useless. Thinking to do good without wisdom is like flying an airplane without knowledge of the laws of aviation or aerodynamics. .”

Dennis Prager

“What about good intentions? These scared him the most: people with good intentions don’t question themselves. And those who don’t question themselves in the scientific world and beyond are the ones to watch.”

Shanti Sekaran

“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny that is truly practiced for the benefit of the victims may be the most oppressive. Better to live under robbers than under omnipotent moralists. The robber’s cruelty may sleep sometimes, his avarice sometimes. The time will be satisfactory, but those who persecute us for our own sake will torment us without end, Because they do it with the consent of their own conscience, they may be more likely to go to heaven, but at the same time, make the earth a hell.”

CS Lewis

***

See also  São Paulo and the United Kingdom formalize a cooperation agreement to implement the state's Climate Action Plan

Infographics Gazeta do Povo[Clique para ampliar]

©2023 Foundation for Economic Education. Published with permission. Original In English.

You May Also Like

About the Author: Morton Obrien

"Reader. Infuriatingly humble travel enthusiast. Extreme food scholar. Writer. Communicator."

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *