This week, Wildlife Matters Investigates Trail Hunting Myths. But let’s start with a fact: There is no tradition in Trail Hunting. In fact, trail hunting did not exist before the Hunting Act of 2004.
In late 2004, the Master of the Foxhounds Association (MFHA) called a meeting with the Hunting Masters to discuss how to continue hunting while complying with the upcoming Hunting Act, which would become law in early 2005. the Master of the Foxhounds Association (MFHA) called for a meeting with the Hunting Masters to discuss how to continue blood hunting while complying with the upcoming Hunting Act, which would become law in early 2005.
The Hunting Act exemptions were being discussed, particularly on how they could continue to hunt foxes – despite the ban! Some suggested using birds of prey, the game bird exemption, or having terriers hold foxes. However, what they came up with was far more sinister and disturbing. They were going to create a smokescreen by creating a hybrid of blood hunting and the traditional, no-kill sport of drag Hunting.
The MFHA had created a monster! A bastardisation that would become known as Trail Hunting. What is Trail Hunting? This unethical, illegal activity would use the laying of a pre-scented drag (a cloth scented with fox urine) to create a pre-laid trail for the hunters and hounds to follow, or would they?
The reality was that the blood hunters had no intention of following a pre-laid scent trail; some would go through the process of laying a trail, but it was apparent to Hunt monitors that once the pack was released, they invariably set off in a different direction, following the scent of a live fox with the inevitable consequence that foxes were still being brutally killed. Still, now the hunt had a near-perfect alibi every time they committed an offence. They claimed it was ‘an accident’. Undeterred, the Hunt monitors provided copious amounts of video and picture evidence to the Police. Still, it soon became clear that the Police had little appetite for investigating or prosecuting offenders under the Hunting Act.
Before the Hunting Act came into force, the Masters of the Draghounds and Bloodhounds Association (MDBA) were particularly concerned about illegal live fox hunting and the pseudo-laying of a trail that mimicked their sport would have a detrimental effect on Drag hunting. They were right to be concerned. Many were former Fox hunters whose primary motivation was to enjoy riding their horses over challenging terrain. That was what they wanted to do; the killing of the fox was not something they wanted to do. So, how could they stop the blood hunters from bringing their sport into disrepute?
The MDBA insisted that the term’ drag hunting’ would remain exclusive property and that the two Associations should no longer be associated. The Masters of the Foxhounds Association didn’t want this, but their desire to continue to hunt foxes was strong, so they decided to create a new name and the term’ trail hunting’ was born.
What is Trail hunting? It was designed to replicate blood hunting as much as possible. It involves simulating the search for a scent for the foxhounds to follow. The laying of trails, it was claimed, was carried out in such a way as to mirror the movements of the hunted live quarry – hunters speak for a fox -with the result that the hunt’s progress would be less predictable and at a far slower pace than that of a Drag hunt.
The Trail Hunts claimed they had more emphasis on hound work than the Drag Hunts. The trail scent purportedly used was animal-based; there is little information on the type of scent used, but in the case of traditional fox hunting packs, fox urine was often claimed to be used. Their reasoning for using animal-based scents was that when the Hunting Act was repealed, they would be in a better position to resume blood hunting with hounds that would not have to be retrained to foxes. I think it is fair to say that they were delusional and ultimately denied the law at this time. Sadly, nearly twenty years on, many still are both delusional and in denial.
At the time, the then Director of the Masters of Foxhounds Association, Alastair Jackson, said:
“While the Hunting Act is in place, trail hunting is one of the several legal alternatives to provide activity for Hunts. This is for hounds to follow an artificial scent, which has been laid in such a way as to mimic a real fox hunt. It would ideally not be the flat-out gallop typical of drag hunting, and would take in different types of country, and be a challenge for the hounds.’ It is one of the ways to keep Hunts’ infrastructure intact until the Hunting Act’s repeal can be achieved.”
“Measures need to be taken to avoid hunting live quarry – as the trail scent laid is animal-based and trails are laid in areas where traditionally live quarry have been found; it is not surprising that the hounds often pick up the scent of an animal and pursue it” “Since November 2004, traditional hunts have had to retrain their hounds to follow an artificial scent. However, hunts claim they are trying to replicate pre-ban hunting as closely as possible”.
He had set out their situation. They would continue to hunt foxes and use Trail Hunting as a disguise. Driver’s statement was often the defence used by hunters, who claimed they were trail hunting when their hounds accidentally picked up the scent of their fox and had killed it before the huntsman could stop them!
This raised many more questions for Hunt monitors, but, amazingly, it seemed sufficient to satisfy the judges in cases brought to the courts.
Hunt monitors knew the Blood hunters did not want to convert to Drag hunting as they wanted their dogs to retain the scenting ability for a wild quarry in the hope that the Hunting Act would be repealed, but why did the Courts not consider that If a Trail hunter was taking reasonable steps to avoid hunting a live quarry, they why would they not have retrained their hounds to follow an artificial scent, that would have virtually eliminated the possibility of the hounds picking up on a foxes scent. Why did they continue to hunt in known fox habitats, and did they have control of their hounds, as they were letting them run loose in public areas and had a responsibility to be able to control them?
The Masters of the Drag Hounds Association made it clear in a recent statement that if a hunting group takes reasonable steps to avoid pursuing a live animal, they should be able to demonstrate that they have retrained their hounds to track an artificial scent instead. The association has introduced young hounds over the past few seasons, which they have trained to follow non-animal scents. The MDBA has emphasized that if a group intends to trail hunt, there are several measures they can take to prevent any accidents, such as hunting live game.
The MDBA statement continued: First, to avoid those areas most likely used by the hunt’s traditional quarry and not to lay a scent in those areas. Secondly, when hunting live quarry, the line is unpredictable, and the animal may run anywhere, but with trail hunting, the exact route is known.”
“So it is straightforward to position hunt servants and hunt supporters at key positions so that they can: (i) watch the hunt, and (ii) help stop hounds if they change to live quarry, or inform the Huntsman to help stop hounds if they change to live quarry or inform the Huntsman if the hounds have changed to live quarry so that the hunt can be ended promptly.”
You may think that the Trail Hunters’ game was over. The Hunt had been rumbled and publicly exposed by their former associates at the Drag Hunting Association.
Tragically, for many foxes and a good number of innocent pets that the hounds have killed, the Trail hunters have continued the pretence of following the scent since 2005. Despite several successful prosecutions taken by the RSPCA and League Against Cruel Sports as the Police were failing to take cases to court, overall, the hunters have used their influence to stop the prosecutions of very many hunt members and staff despite an overwhelming amount of evidence to support that they were illegally killing foxes.
As smartphones have become a part of everyday life, they have had a significant impact on gaining evidence of illegal hunting, and the Hunt Sab groups and Hunt Monitors have thousands of videos of illicit activity. Most of these have never been reviewed by the Police, and those are rarely recommended for prosecution by the CPS (Crown Prosecution Service). Even the few cases that made it to the British courts were often dismissed by judges on technical grounds. The Hunt monitors went public in their dismay as they revealed how many British Judiciary, Police and local government officials were members of their local hunts.
It was clear that despite the Hunting Act, those of us who wanted to end the suffering of wild animals for so-called ‘sport’ still had a mountain to climb. But the Hunt Sabs didn’t give up protecting animals; many volunteers have dedicated hours every week to stop the hunts from killing wildlife.
Eventually, things changed significantly in August 2020, when the MFHA held a series of Zoom training seminars for Hunt Masters designed to help them maintain the pretence of Trail hunting. This included some specific training on what to say to the Police in the event of an investigation into any hunt activities.
Mark Hankinson, a Director of the MFHA, delivered that specific training. Hunt Saboteurs recorded the MFHA Zoom calls and leaked them to the media. Mark Hankinson was subsequently prosecuted and found guilty.
That conviction has undoubtedly contributed to an implosion within the MFHA, with the Chairman, Lord Mancroft, being replaced in May 2021 as he and four other MFHA staff, including two former Police Officers, could all face possible prosecution relating to their comments on the Zoom calls. The Judge noted their words during Mark Hankinson’s trial. It is hoped that private prosecutions of the other five people involved in delivering the training at the MFHA seminar will follow, should the CPS decide not to prosecute them.
Trail Hunting has a wafer-thin veneer of pretence to comply with the law of the land. Blood hunters who willfully disregard the law should face custodial sentences, and landowners who allow hunting on their land should face the exact charges as anyone caught blood hunting on their land.
There is no reason to hunt wild animals with packs of hounds and mounted riders today—there never was!
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
Please click on the Wildlife Matters Patreon Community.
Please click to join the Wildlife Matters Substack Community.
You can donate here.
Further Reading
Trail Hunting – League Against Cruel Sports
What is Trail Hunting? – Protect the Wild
Trail Hunting – Fox Hunting Evidence UK
w
