A Moral Disconnection from Nature: Hunting, Shooting and Fishing in the UK

by Philip Kratz

John had a flourishing life before he was killed. He grew up in a playful environment with three siblings. One day, he was on his way to play in the woods with his sister Ivy.  Suddenly, he heard a pack of dogs barking and charging through the undergrowth. Although he tried to flee, the dogs quickly picked up his scent.  Despite being illegal to hunt with dogs, the pack of hounds was still released under the guise of “trail hunting”. John was chased until exhaustion and eventually caught by the hounds.  Two men on horseback arrived, members of the hunt, watching as the dogs tore into him. No shot was fired;  his end came through relentless pursuit and mauling.  Later, what remained of his body was collected, and one of the riders took a piece of his orange fur as a “trophy”.  John was barely a year old, but he was born into a society where wildlife can still be chased and killed under loopholes and weak enforcement.  Imagine how much more joy he could have known, and how many more years he could have lived, if it weren’t for the men who cling to this cruel tradition of bloodsport.

(a) Fox hunting scene with foxhounds and riders in red coats. Image by Jason Wolf

Why the UK Faces a Moral Disconnect from Nature

The United Kingdom is facing a crisis of moral disconnection with the natural world. At the heart of this crisis lie entrenched practices like fox hunting, gamebird shooting, and fishing. Long justified through tradition, sport, and economic argument, these activities inflict grave harm on wild animals and ecosystems alike. Together, this exploitation undermines conservation and our collective moral responsibility toward non-human life.

The Importance of Sentience

It’s time to ask, would the UK be better off with more compassionate conservation?  Yes, it would.  Before we dive into the reasons, let’s have a look at why sentience is of key importance and a top measurement of whether our actions are morally justifiable. 

When we forage wild mushrooms or herbs, we are removing life from the landscape, but not sentient life. A mushroom cannot feel fear or affection. A fox, deer, bird, or fish can.  That distinction should matter.  

As sentient animals, they experience joy and suffering.  As they have families, bonds, and social needs, when we kill an animal, we’re not just removing a piece of nature; we're extinguishing a conscious life.  Shooting a mother fox means that her babies will grow up without her.  If they can’t feed themselves, they are likely to die.  What if the fish you are catching was on the way to his buddy, and they wanted to jump around in the stream?  Killing animals in the wild can have so many more negative consequences than taking this animal’s life away (as if that wasn’t enough).  

In short, taking a mushroom is taking something, but killing an animal is taking someone. Cutting off the top of a mushroom with your knife is completely different to cutting off the head of a deer, fox, fish, dog or cat.

b)  Fallow deer grooming each other and strengthening social bonds.  Image by Uday Kiran

Fox Hunting in the UK: A Justified Tradition or Hidden Cruelty?

The practice of hunting wild mammals with packs of dogs, historically associated with the pursuit of foxes, deer and hares, has been a highly contentious issue in the United Kingdom. While legislation formally outlawed this activity, a loophole known as “trail hunting” persists. This has raised serious concerns about its true intent and its devastating consequences for wild animals and the environment. In theory, trail hunting involves following an artificially laid animal scent trail, but in reality, it often serves as a smokescreen for the illegal hunting and killing of foxes, hares and deer. These events inflict immense fear and suffering upon the animals, disrupt the delicate balance of ecosystems, and frequently occur in areas of vital ecological significance, exacerbating the negative impact.

How Fox Hunting Harms UK Ecosystems

Research indicates a troubling decline in fox populations since the 1990s, a trend that has undoubtedly been worsened by their continued persecution through predator control and the collateral damage of supposedly legal trail hunts (1). Foxes hold a crucial position in maintaining the health of ecosystems. When fox populations are depleted through hunting or other forms of persecution, a cascade of negative consequences can unfold (2). For example, foxes enrich soil around their dens by depositing urine and faeces, and continually dig and disturb the soil, which can dramatically boost nutrient levels and subsequently lead to richer vegetation and increased plant diversity (2). Protecting foxes is not merely about preserving a single species but safeguarding the integrity and resilience of the entire ecosystem. 

The Environmental Cost of Gamebird Shooting

Another significant environmental crisis unfolds annually in the United Kingdom, veiled under the guise of traditional countryside pursuits. Every year, a staggering estimated 47 million pheasants and 10 million red-legged partridges are bred in captivity and subsequently released into the British countryside (3). These numbers can even range up to 57 million pheasants and 13 million red-legged partridges. 

These birds are introduced into the ecosystem for one sole purpose: to be shot for entertainment. Not only do the birds lose their lives, but their release imposes a heavy burden on existing ecosystems. The sheer numbers overwhelm habitats and lead to a displacement of wildlife as well as habitat degradation. This includes vegetation removal and drainage works that severely impact biodiversity. Furthermore, they act as vectors for various diseases that can devastate human lives. For example, the probability of ticks carrying Lyme disease in pheasant release areas is nearly 2.5 times higher (4). 

c) Hunted pheasants hanging from a trailer after a gamebird shoot. Image by Nigel Mykura

Fishing in the UK: Billions of Sentient Lives Lost

Industrial and small-scale fishing activities in UK waters constitute a significant source of animal suffering and ecological damage. The practice results in the annual mortality of a shocking 1.5 - 2.7 billion fish through methods such as netting and hooking, as well as unintentional bycatch (5). Adding shellfish is another 4.5 billion deaths annually.  Taken together, that’s at least 16.4 million killed sea animals per day (calculating with the conservative 1.5 billion dead fish). These numbers are difficult to comprehend, but at this rate, if this article is read on a Monday, Brits would be completely extinct by Thursday night.

Fish are sentient beings, capable of experiencing pain, fear, and stress (6). Yet, they are inadequately protected under existing animal welfare legislation. Furthermore, fishing operations exert deleterious effects on entire marine ecosystems. Trawling activities lead to the destruction of seabeds and critical habitats, including seagrass meadows and reefs. Greenhouse gas emissions from fishing vessels are substantial (7), and their activities disrupt the ocean's capacity for carbon absorption, thereby diminishing climate resilience. It seems more than logical that fishing has a negative impact on overall marine biodiversity. However, research on the internet quickly leads you to so-called “sustainable fishing methods”. The designation of any form of this practice as "sustainable" obscures its fundamental nature, which is the lethal exploitation of sentient life. Or as the movie Finding Nemo teaches us: “Fish are friends, not food”! 

d) Fish cannot scream but they feel pain just like us. Image by David Todd McCarty

Notably, discrimination towards fish is not only an industry problem. It is quite a common practice for humans, especially men, to post pictures holding a dead fish.  The same procedure with a dog or cat would be unimaginable. This shows further how normalised killing specific animals is and how few questions are asked.  Imagine how devastated you would be if a shark were to kill your child, even if the shark was saved from starvation through the act. You most likely still would not find the shark's action just. So why would you kill your food? In comparison to the shark, you can go to the supermarket and find a wonderful plant-based fish and countless other plant-based options.

Compassionate Conservation: A Better Path Forward

Four core principles underpin Compassionate Conservation: 

Do No Harm: Let’s stop justifying killing under the guise of management, sport, tradition or profit!

Individuals Matter: A fox chased by hounds, a pheasant reared to be shot, or a fish suffocating on a deck—each is a life with subjective experience.

Inclusivity: All species are included.  We don’t rate species as quarry or stock, but as fellow inhabitants of this shared land and sea.

Coexist Peacefully: True conservation means learning to live with wildlife, not managing it through violence.

More about compassion conservation can be found on our website.

A More Compassionate UK: Vision and Action

A compassionate UK would no longer tolerate killing sentient beings for entertainment, profit, or tradition. It would protect animals instead of persecuting them. It would allow fish to live in thriving oceans, not be dragged from them by the millions. It would cherish foxes as symbols of wildness, not targets for dogs. A UK that chose compassion could lead the world in conservation ethics, animal protection, and climate integrity. 

But more than that, it would be honest about what it means to care for nature. It would extend moral concern beyond pets and photogenic species, embracing the full range of life as worthy of protection and care. The UK would then acknowledge that its land is not solely for human use but is shared with other animals who want to lead fulfilling lives as well.

What can we do as individuals? 

The most effective method is the easiest: Do not fish, shoot, or kill. There are countless other activities you could do instead, and 99% of them would be more peaceful. If you specifically choose violence when you easily couldn’t, what does this say about your character? 

When it comes to rejecting fox hunting, you can: 

1. Avoid supporting landowners or events linked to hunting. eg: “trail hunting,” point to points, Hunt balls and eating UK animal meat.(fallen stock can be collected by hunts and fed to the hounds) 

2. Report suspected illegal hunts to anti-hunting organisations (e.g., Hunt Saboteurs Association, League Against Cruel Sports).

3. Pressure local councils and landowners to ban trail hunting on public and trust-owned land (as the National Trust and Forestry England have done).

When it comes to rejecting gamebird shooting, you can: 

1. Do not participate in or support shooting events, and avoid businesses or countryside estates that profit from them. Eg: farm shops and B&Bs.

2. Refuse to buy pheasant, partridge, or grouse (or just dead birds in general)

3. Contact your MP to push for restrictions on gamebird release and for better protection of native predators.

4. Raise awareness about how shooting harms wild animals, soil, and ecosystems. 

When it comes to choosing compassion over fishing, you can: 

1. Stop eating fish—this is the single most direct and powerful step to reduce suffering and environmental harm in oceans, rivers and lakes.

2. Support marine conservation efforts that protect fish as living beings, not just resources.

3. Share facts with others about fish— e. g. many still believe fish don’t feel pain. 

When it comes to promoting compassionate conservation, you can: 

1. Educate others: Talk about the importance of its core principles

2. Volunteer or donate to animal advocacy and wildlife protection groups that reject killing as a management tool.

3. Encourage peaceful coexistence: Support wildlife crossings, predator-friendly farming, and rewilding initiatives that avoid culling.

There are so many ways to do your bit.  Why not encourage campaigns by signing petitions, or help shape legislation by completing Government Consultations, or support research by filling in surveys?  If you want to be more directly involved on a regular basis, you could even volunteer for Verify Humanity. 

Literary References

[1] Murphy, A. (2019). No wonder fox hunting is still prevalent – the ban is designed to fail British wildlife. The Conversation. Article  License CC-BY-ND

[2] Lang, J. A., Roth, J. D., & Markham, J. H. (2021). Foxes fertilize the subarctic forest and modify vegetation through denning. Scientific reports, 11(1), 3031. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-82742-y License

[3] Aebischer, N.J. Fifty-year trends in UK hunting bags of birds and mammals, and calibrated estimation of national bag size, using GWCT’s National Gamebag Census. Eur J Wildl Res 65, 64 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10344-019-1299-x (Purchased License)

[4] Michels, E., Hansford, K., Perkins, S. E., McDonald, R. A., Medlock, J. M., & Tschirren, B. (2025). The release of Non‐Native Gamebirds is associated with amplified zoonotic disease risk. Ecology Letters, 28(4). https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.70115   License

[5] Garratt, J. K., & McCulloch, S. P. (2022). Wild Fish Welfare in UK Commercial Sea Fisheries: Qualitative Analysis of Stakeholder Views. Animals: an open access journal from MDPI, 12(20), 2756. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12202756 License

[6] Lambert, H., Cornish, A., Elwin, A., & D’Cruze, N. (2022). A Kettle of Fish: A Review of the Scientific Literature for Evidence of Fish Sentience. Animals, 12(9), 1182. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12091182 License

[7] Engelhard, G. (2023). How can UK fisheries move towards Net Zero by 2050? Marine Science Open Government License

Images 

1. Fox hunting scene with foxhounds and riders in red coats. Image by Jason Wolf on Unsplash.

2.  Fallow deer grooming each other and strengthening social bonds.  Image by Uday Kiran on Unsplash.

3. Hunted pheasants hanging from a trailer after a gamebird shoot on Geograph.  Image by Nigel Mykura Licence - CC BY-SA