My blood boils as I ask myself why, in the 21st century, some people still choose to hunt animals.
I’m disgusted that foxes are ruthlessly killed; their delicate corpses are ripped apart by packs of hounds and left for dead. What sickens me further is that not even a single part of the fox is used, yet these hunters still delight in the fruitless hunt.
18 years after the Hunting Act made it illegal to hunt wild mammals with packs of dogs in England and Wales, there are still hunting packs raising hounds and riding with up to 40 dogs through the countryside, with one purpose: to kill wildlife.
How can this be? Over 85% of the British public is vehemently against fox hunting: so why does it still continue?
It’s a question that I can’t answer. All I know is that this senseless slaughter must stop.
The Hunting Act 2004
The Hunting Act 2004 was the culmination of a long, tumultuous journey through the UK parliament, enacted to protect wild mammals from hunters and their packs of dogs.
The foxes, deer, hares, otters, and mink were species in the most need of safeguarding. Despite its popularity with the public, it has been challenged by leading pro-hunt organisations such as the Countryside Alliance and Master of the Foxhounds Association (MFHA).
The punishment for offenders of the Hunting Act is severe; they face an unlimited fine upon summary conviction at the discretion of judges and a maximum penalty not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale with no upper limit. Yet despite this, far too many allegations have gone without proper investigation and far too many illegal hunters have gone unpunished.
This sends a clear message that there is an enforcement problem with the Hunting Act, one that begs to be rectified with urgency.
Much of the ‘outrage’ has been over the ‘loopholes’ within the act. These exemptions were crafted to allow the Hunting Act to not impede activities not intended by Parliament to disallow.
Hunts have deliberately abused these exemptions when caught hunting. For example, stag hunts exploit the ‘Research and Observation’ exemption meant for researchers, and fox hunts bring birds of prey to take cover under the ‘falconry’ exemption meant for falconers.
But by far the most farcical misuse of the Hunting Act is that of Trail Hunting, which did not exist prior to 2005.
Trail Hunting
Drag hunting is rooted in tradition, exempt from the Hunting Act due to its true form following the pre-laid scent trail.
Since 2005, however, a new breed of hunting has entered the fields-Trail hunting-which claims to lay a scent trail that attempts to mimic the natural movement of a fox, while conveniently absolving its participants of any wrong doing if they end up following a live animal scent.
The participants don blood-red coats and career across the countryside with their hounds, a chillingly deliberate attempt at fox hunting.
Imagine, driving a pack of dogs down your local street – almost certainly the Police would arrest you as they would consider it a danger to the public, Yet trail hunters are allowed to do this on a regular basis in the countryside due to some archaic assumption of ‘country ways’.
The time for trail hunting has run out. It is clear that Trail hunting must be banned.
I have watched in horror as countless innocent foxes were torn apart by hounds, driven on by jeering huntsmen while the Hunt Monitors observed and recorded the blatant disregard for the lives of the foxes.
I have borne witness to countless violations of the Hunting Act, yet on nearly every occasion the perpetrators are allowed to evade punishment.
I have seen my fellow sabs bravely fight against an unyielding enemy, only to be met with ruthless aggression; kicked, punched, beaten with riding crops and even run over by horses.
Even when justice has been sought, it has been denied as the police have proven time and time again that they will not stand against violence against wildlife protectors.
It is clear that after 18 years, it is time to strengthen the Hunting Act by introducing seven key amendments.
For too long have these hunters acted above the law and it is high time that their horrific acts are banned once and for all.
Strengthen the Hunting Act
To ensure that wild animals are protected in the way the Hunting Act intended, the British Government needs to dramatically improve the enforcement of the Hunting Act and add the following clauses:
1. Hunting with intent – Introduction of reverse to the burden of proof in “exempt hunting” cases
By introducing the clause the hunter will be required to prove they were not hunting, rather than the current situation where witnesses have to prove the hunt were actively hunting. Hunts would need to prove they have followed all the conditions stipulated by the Hunting Act 2004 relevant to the type of exempt hunting they claim to be doing. This is not unprecedented, a reversal of the burden of proof for exempt hunting was one of the recommendations made by Lord Bonomy in his review of Scottish hunting legislation.
2. The addition of a ‘reckless’ clause would stop hunters from using the false alibi of trail hunting
Trail Hunting is merely a ‘smokescreen’ for illegal hunting – the MFHA admitted it themselves in the exposure of their ‘training’ meeting of Masters in August 2020, One of their Directors, Mark Hankinson was successfully prosecuted, however, other Directors, employees and Consultants of the MFHA have still not been prosecuted despite overwhelming evidence against them! They clearly cannot be trusted to control their behaviour, therefore, for the safety of the public and the protection of wild animals, specifically foxes, but to include all animals wild or domestic, the best way to counteract Trail Hunting is to include a reckless provision in the Hunting Act. This would mean Hunters could be prosecuted, not only when it can be proven they intended to hunt wild mammals with dogs, but also when it can be proven they were reckless by not preventing their dogs from actively pursuing harming or killing another animal.
3. The use of dogs below ground should be prohibited
This is where some of the worst cruelty in hunting takes place, not only to wild foxes pursued underground without a chance of escape from the hounds but also to the terrier dogs that are sent underground to either ‘flush them out’ or ‘hold them at bay. It is clear that there is no legitimate purpose for Terrier men at a drag or clean boot hunt, therefore, the role of, or people acting as, terrier men would be liable to have committed an offence under the Hunting Act.
4. Removal of the Observation and Research exemption that has been systematically abused by stag hunts
There are three stag hunts still hunting in England. These Stag hunts have relied on this exemption to survive and continue the terror they subject to stags every year. That is not acceptable to the British Public. The Stag hunts first tried the ‘flushing to guns’ exemption, then the ‘rescuing an injured mammal’ exemption, but both failed in Court, and they were successfully prosecuted for abusing these exemptions. Sadly, since they tried the ‘Research and Observation’ exemption, no prosecutions have progressed when this exemption has been used as a defence. The Stag hunts have never published any data from their research, in the 17 years since the Hunting Act came into force. There is no credible research or evidence of it, and therefore, the exemption should be removed.
5. Application of ‘vicarious liability to cover the employers and landowners of those in breach of the Act
Introducing a ‘vicarious liability’ clause to the Hunting Act would enable those who facilitate illegal hunting to be prosecuted. This would include Hunt Masters, Hunt Members, and the landowner, who authorised the hunt on their land. Without authorisation, hunting is already illegal. Many of the prosecutions under the Hunting Act have been hunt staff or paid employees or contractors of the hunt who are charged and subsequently prosecuted, whilst those who were hunting are not prosecuted. This needs to change and vicarious liability is a very efficient way of achieving that change.
6. An extension of the available time to charge suspects with breaching the Act
At present, a defendant must be charged within six months of committing an offence under the Hunting Act. In practice, this means that the police simply do not have the resources to secure a charge within that time. Meaning, that suspected illegal hunting is going unpunished. This is surely contrary to the intention of the Act to protect wild animals.
7. Sentencing powers should be increased
The sentencing powers available to Judges under the Hunting Act are restricted to fines. We believe this undermines the Hunting Act in the eyes of the offenders who have admitted to flouting the law. So much so that during the exposed MFHA webinar from August 2020 the trainers openly discussed doing this and how to deceive the Police!
Wildlife Matters believes the Hunting Act must be brought up to the same level of protection as the Badgers Protection Act and the Wild Mammals Protection Act.
Wildlife Matters calls for a minimum sentence of six months imprisonment for anyone who violates these acts, providing a true deterrent to members of the hunt.
Wildlife Matters believes that these amendments will shut down the hunting of wild mammals, making it clear to the police that anyone engaging in such activities must accept they face prosecution for illegally hunting wild animals.
This will be a blow against the tyranny and terror inflicted by those who hunt and kill foxes for pleasure and bring an end to centuries of abuses against wildlife, our countryside, and our rural communities.
We invite all groups and NGOs that support these amendments to join us in taking urgent action to ensure that the British government strictly enforces these laws so that all wild animals – and the public – can truly be protected from any abuse or injury caused by illegal hunting activities.
Further Reading
Everything you need to know about Hunting by Hunt Saboteurs
Build on the Ban Strengthen the Act by Campaign to Strengthen the Hunting Act
Strengthen the Hunting Act by League Against Cruel Sports
If you enjoyed this blog, please check out more of our wildlife blogs here, or you may prefer to listen to the Wildlife Matters Podcast here.
If you want to support our work, You can donate here.
possible.