• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Persuasive Writing Coursework:Fox-Hunting Speech to be Read out at in Protest to a League Against Cruel Sports City Rally.

Extracts from this document...


Persuasive Writing Coursework: Fox-Hunting Speech to be Read out at in Protest to a League Against Cruel Sports City Rally. So YES to fox-hunting. Fox-hunting is a humane, natural, and traditional way of controlling the fox population. If certain culling exercises did not take place the number of these pests would dramatically increase. Do you really wish our beautiful country to be over run with pests and vermin? These animals murder livestock, cause havoc to farmers and scavenge in cities. As one of the main anti-hunting groups in the UK, the League Against Cruel Sports, is presumed to put animal welfare at the centre of its argument against the activity. This is rubbish. Five people have left - two of whom are chief executives - in protest at the League's disgraceful behaviour, ridiculous statements and unruly protest tactics. Fox-hunting is a way of naturally decreasing the fox, mink, deer and hare populations. Master of the Fox Hounds Association Hunts is regulated by strict and detailed rules which hunt officials must obey. The standard of behaviour of followers has long been governed by an informal code. For this reason, hunting's conventions, and the responsibilities of its followers, are set down in the code of the fox-hunters. The followers of fox-hunting are not blood seeking, death hunting, murderous members of the population. They are, infact, traditionalists who care for the environment and wish to preserve a practice that has take place for hundreds of years. ...read more.


Luckily that has not been the case as the ban is not total in that sense. I find it highly ironic that these people are all for protecting vermin, however the fact that this might come with the consequence of the pointless killing of hundreds of dogs is somehow fine with them. If you can justify the murder of dogs for no benefit whatsoever, why is it so hard to justify the killing of foxes to help farmers protect their livestock. Over 15,000 foxhounds are involved in the 318 hound packs across Britain. Without fox-hunting, all of these animals would have to be removed. It would be crueller to have all of these animals put to sleep because there is no work for them and the animal sanctuaries could never hold and re-home that number of dogs. Do you wish the deaths of thousands of dogs to be on your conscience? Healthy, happy and free-roaming hunting dogs or hundreds of dead corpses? Happy dogs make thousands of hunts possible. Without happy dogs, who enjoy their work, hunts would not be able to take place. There is also the destruction of an economy that has to be considered. The fact is that hunting supports the economy, which provides a large amount of revenue to the government every year, are we really so wealthy as a country that the government can afford to simply write this off as and when they feel like it, not only causing a loss of revenue from taxes, but also possibly leading to an increase in unemployment benefits. ...read more.


195,000 ordinary women and men from all walks of life, support hunting, most of them on foot. Logically it cannot be right for MPs to ban hunting with hounds, and not hunting with a gun or a fishing rod, purely because they don't like the people they believe support hunting with dogs. The proposal to ban hunting is an attack on the people that hunt, rather than an improvement in animal welfare. The vast majority of opposition comes from urban Labour MPs with no hunting in their backgrounds and is often based on old political scores and not on reality. The hunting ban is just an excuse to attack one of the dwindling numbers of ancient traditions of Britain. Decisions on hunting should be made by those involved in wildlife management and farming. The people who matter in wildlife management and animal welfare are the people who care for animals rather than those who care about them. No person can form a responsible opinion without ever experiencing the event and being in possession of the correct facts. From this protest, which contradicts all statements, I hope that you can see that there is no argument against fox-hunting. The figures that have been produced are clearly wrong and leading members of the Veterinary College and the findings of the Government report in 1997 has refuted all statements and questions about fox-hunting. You say fox-hunting is cruel, we say it is necessary, sociable and traditional. We are prepared to fight for our traditional way of life. ?? ?? ?? ?? Sarah Merchant 10KAW English Draft ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Writing to Argue, Persuade and Advise section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Writing to Argue, Persuade and Advise essays

  1. Hong Kong- City of Dreams

    Apart from these commercial buildings, there are more tourist attractions in Hong Kong such as Disneyland, the Buddhist status in Lantau Island and Ngong Ping cable cars, which are also very popular and loved by tourists.

  2. Should Fox hunting be banned?

    Anti-fox hunting views Animal Aid are opposed to all forms of animal cruelty and they are strongly opposed to hunting. They believe hunting with hounds has no place in modern Britain. It should have ended years ago along with cock fighting, bear-baiting and dog-fighting.

  1. Huckleberry Finn Coursework

    This is similar to the Grangerfords as they say they are totally Christian, but still take their guns to church and kill for their own means. Though for Silver and his men, the idea of inflicting physical damage to a Bible is worst and more frightening than violating the Bible's precepts, suggesting a more ritual than spiritual outlook on religion.

  2. Supersize me coursework

    For example, when Morgan Spurlock says that the quantity of calories in McDonalds foods is unbelievable. Facts like this one were used throughout the film. In order to shock the audience, Spurlock uses foul language such as "shit" and "sue the bastards".

  1. Advertising coursework (McDonalds)

    The toys that are given away are usually related to the latest children's film or range of new toys. The toys are normally part of a collection of about 5, with a different toy in the happy meal box every week.

  2. Fox Hunting

    Even by farmers' estimates, studies show that only around one in two hundred lambs are killed by foxes, whereas between 10% and 24% of lambs die from hypothermia, malnutrition, disease or are still-born. Foxes carry away such casualties and as they are often seen in the lambing fields, they are ideal scapegoats for bad husbandry or lazy shepherds.

  1. Magazine coursework

    Have a rest if you need one! If you find this easy, increase speed, quantity of repetitions or use burdening (for example, bottles of water or your drink bottles to boost you up and give you the energy). It's fun and worth a go, so why not give it a try?

  2. Critical Responce On Obama's Speech Informing Osama Bin Laden Is Dead

    was wrong by using the different word choices of ?killed? and ?slaughtered?. Obama uses the word ?killed? to describe Osama?s death showing there was no remorse over his death and the audience can tell this through his impartial emotions. However, when he talks about Osama slaughtering many Americans, it sounds

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work