Do Foxes Need Controlling?
Quiet simply, no. Artificial control of foxes by hunting,
shooting, snaring etc. is neither necessary nor useful. Foxes,
as with many wild animals, have their own biological method of
population control. They will breed up to, but not over, the
optimum level sustainable by their local environment.
Thus in areas where the fox population is high or food is
scarce, vixens will breed small litters of cubs, whereas in
areas where the opposite is the case, a larger litter will
result.
Obviously then, when humans take a hand by killing foxes in an
attempt at control, one of the main results will be that they
will breed faster to compensate. This has been shown time and
again in scientific studies, most notably in the study conducted
by Dr Ray Hewson which found that when foxes were left
unpersecuted the population level remained stable.
Far from being "over-run with foxes" as hunters would have us
believe, if foxes were not controlled in any way the only
difference it would make is to produce a healthier fox
population at the same level.
Even if fox control were necessary, it is difficult to imagine a
less effective way of carrying it out than hunting. After a
study by Dr Stephen Harris of Bristol University in 1997/1997 it
was reckoned that foxhunts kill around 2.5% of Britain's foxes
every year. As overseas studies on rabies control have shown
that fox populations can withstand an anual mortality rate of
70%, the hunters have a very long way to go before they can
claim to be an effective method of control.
(Extract from "Foxhunting" by the HSA)
Return to HSA homepage |
Library Index |