The Fox Pen Controversy…Sport or Cruelty?
By Greta Burroughs
Fox pens are legal in just a few states including SC and there are 13 fox pens already in Horry County. Fox pens are fenced in areas where foxes and coyotes are used to train dogs for hunting or competition. The wild animals are purchased by the pen owner from a licensed trapper during trapping season, Jan. 1 until March 1 and they are allowed until April 1 to finish their transactions.
The pens operate under a permit from SC Department of Natural Resources but the SCDNR has no regulatory authority to set limitations on size, fencing or husbandry, according to Jay Butfiloski, Wildlife Specialist with the SCDNR.
Butfiloski also said that there are no requirements for disease mitigation either. “The owners are left up to their own devices on that. I don’t know if there are vaccines available or if they can use the same type of vaccines that are available for pets.”
He commented that the first fox pens were established around 1985 and his office had not received many complaints about them until the latest situation arose in Horry County. “In the last two months, we have had more complaints than I can ever recall.”
Around 2002, SCDNR was asked to work with the owners to come up with some meaningful legislation regarding fox pens. “It would have set size requirements, stocking requirements and a fee schedule for the permits like we have with the shooting preserves. It included an ability for us to inspect, mandatory reporting, set how many dogs could be run, how many animals could be put in there, provisions for shelter, food and escape devices and have an acclimatization period for the wild animals to get used to their new environment,” explained Butfiloski.
He went on to say that the pen owners did not agree with the proposal. “As our legislative system works, they were able to convince their legislators that it would be too onerous for them. They had a better argument and won. All we got was the ability to permit the pens for free and that’s it.”
When asked if legislation could be introduced again, Butfiloski responded, “It would take little hot spots like in Horry County to cause it. We cannot introduce the legislation ourselves; it has to be encouraged through the public. If there is enough momentum, we may be requested by a legislator to look into it, and we would get involved in the process. We can draft a proposal but we cannot make it into law. That’s up to the legislators.”
The Humane Society of the United States worked to assist the residents in Horry County to stop the fox pen. Casey Pheiffer, Campaign Manager for the HSUS Wildlife Abuse Campaign commented, “The neighbors did a great job of making their concerns heard. We are frequently contacted by neighbors who live next door to fox pens because they have the unfortunate experience of seeing the captive foxes and coyotes ripped apart by dogs.
“Foxes and coyotes are trapped in the wild and then released in these enclosures where they are literally forced to run for their lives. Once released in the pens, the animals are frequently torn apart by dogs in competitions. If not torn apart immediately, they subsist unnaturally on a diet of dog food and are subjected to continual harassment by dogs.”
When asked about the spread of diseases, Pheiffer answered, “The permit regulations for pens are intended to cut down on the possibility of diseases spreading. Historically, pens are directly responsible for the spread of some strains of rabies. And officials are particularly concerned about the parasite, Alveolar Echinococcosis.” [AE disease results from being infected with a microscopic tapeworm found in foxes, coyotes, dogs, and cats. Although human cases are rare, infection in humans causes parasitic tumors to form in the liver, and, less commonly, the lungs, brain, and other organs. If left untreated, infection with AE can be fatal.]
She continued, “But the regulations on the books and the reality of the situation are two different things. The problem with these regulations is that it doesn’t change the fact that pens are breeding grounds for disease. Nothing spreads disease like stocking wild animals in high, unnatural densities in an enclosed space.
“After the uproar from residents in response to a proposed new pen, state decision makers should really listen to their constituents and ask themselves if this is a practice South Carolina wants to be known for.”
Mitch McCrackin, one of the partners in the proposed fox pen on WG Road stated, “We were only going to use red foxes, no coyotes, even though there are some coyotes in the wild out there already. We don’t want any dogs to kill them, so we were going to run the dogs with muzzles on them, that way they couldn’t kill the foxes. The dogs usually can’t catch a fox anyway; it is very rare for a dog to catch one.”
McCrackin also stated that the foxes would have been vaccinated, fed every day, provided with fresh water and the pen would have been maintained. "The foxes would live as they do in the wild, building their own dens and living inside the 100 acre lot. We don’t want to lose any of our foxes. We have to buy the game and that is expensive. They would have been taken care of, I promise you that.”
By Greta Burroughs
Fox pens are legal in just a few states including SC and there are 13 fox pens already in Horry County. Fox pens are fenced in areas where foxes and coyotes are used to train dogs for hunting or competition. The wild animals are purchased by the pen owner from a licensed trapper during trapping season, Jan. 1 until March 1 and they are allowed until April 1 to finish their transactions.
The pens operate under a permit from SC Department of Natural Resources but the SCDNR has no regulatory authority to set limitations on size, fencing or husbandry, according to Jay Butfiloski, Wildlife Specialist with the SCDNR.
Butfiloski also said that there are no requirements for disease mitigation either. “The owners are left up to their own devices on that. I don’t know if there are vaccines available or if they can use the same type of vaccines that are available for pets.”
He commented that the first fox pens were established around 1985 and his office had not received many complaints about them until the latest situation arose in Horry County. “In the last two months, we have had more complaints than I can ever recall.”
Around 2002, SCDNR was asked to work with the owners to come up with some meaningful legislation regarding fox pens. “It would have set size requirements, stocking requirements and a fee schedule for the permits like we have with the shooting preserves. It included an ability for us to inspect, mandatory reporting, set how many dogs could be run, how many animals could be put in there, provisions for shelter, food and escape devices and have an acclimatization period for the wild animals to get used to their new environment,” explained Butfiloski.
He went on to say that the pen owners did not agree with the proposal. “As our legislative system works, they were able to convince their legislators that it would be too onerous for them. They had a better argument and won. All we got was the ability to permit the pens for free and that’s it.”
When asked if legislation could be introduced again, Butfiloski responded, “It would take little hot spots like in Horry County to cause it. We cannot introduce the legislation ourselves; it has to be encouraged through the public. If there is enough momentum, we may be requested by a legislator to look into it, and we would get involved in the process. We can draft a proposal but we cannot make it into law. That’s up to the legislators.”
The Humane Society of the United States worked to assist the residents in Horry County to stop the fox pen. Casey Pheiffer, Campaign Manager for the HSUS Wildlife Abuse Campaign commented, “The neighbors did a great job of making their concerns heard. We are frequently contacted by neighbors who live next door to fox pens because they have the unfortunate experience of seeing the captive foxes and coyotes ripped apart by dogs.
“Foxes and coyotes are trapped in the wild and then released in these enclosures where they are literally forced to run for their lives. Once released in the pens, the animals are frequently torn apart by dogs in competitions. If not torn apart immediately, they subsist unnaturally on a diet of dog food and are subjected to continual harassment by dogs.”
When asked about the spread of diseases, Pheiffer answered, “The permit regulations for pens are intended to cut down on the possibility of diseases spreading. Historically, pens are directly responsible for the spread of some strains of rabies. And officials are particularly concerned about the parasite, Alveolar Echinococcosis.” [AE disease results from being infected with a microscopic tapeworm found in foxes, coyotes, dogs, and cats. Although human cases are rare, infection in humans causes parasitic tumors to form in the liver, and, less commonly, the lungs, brain, and other organs. If left untreated, infection with AE can be fatal.]
She continued, “But the regulations on the books and the reality of the situation are two different things. The problem with these regulations is that it doesn’t change the fact that pens are breeding grounds for disease. Nothing spreads disease like stocking wild animals in high, unnatural densities in an enclosed space.
“After the uproar from residents in response to a proposed new pen, state decision makers should really listen to their constituents and ask themselves if this is a practice South Carolina wants to be known for.”
Mitch McCrackin, one of the partners in the proposed fox pen on WG Road stated, “We were only going to use red foxes, no coyotes, even though there are some coyotes in the wild out there already. We don’t want any dogs to kill them, so we were going to run the dogs with muzzles on them, that way they couldn’t kill the foxes. The dogs usually can’t catch a fox anyway; it is very rare for a dog to catch one.”
McCrackin also stated that the foxes would have been vaccinated, fed every day, provided with fresh water and the pen would have been maintained. "The foxes would live as they do in the wild, building their own dens and living inside the 100 acre lot. We don’t want to lose any of our foxes. We have to buy the game and that is expensive. They would have been taken care of, I promise you that.”