Time to strengthen the Hunting Act

Election time is time to strengthen the Hunting Act

The Hunting Act (18th November 2004) ‘ENACTED by The Queen’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Commons in this present Parliament assembled, in accordance with the provisions of the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949, and by the authority of the same, as follows:--PART 1 OFFENCES Hunting wild mammals with dogs’

The hunting Act is a landmark piece of legislation. It is the first law to ever give an animal a right. That right is to be able to live in peace without being chased and pulled apart by a pack of dogs. And, contrary to the hunters’ claims that it is not working, the latest figures show that the Act out-performs all other wild mammal legislation in England and Wales, having the highest number of convictions since it was introduced all those years ago. (341 between 2005 and 2013).

And there we have it, or at least the gist of it anyway, and for more than 10 years a war has been waging between the pro-hunting set and those against the cruelty.

---

Governments have changed, and our present Prime Minister, along with most of his Cabinet, has not been backward in coming forward with support for repeal.

Yet the Act is still on the statute books, and the charities are still bringing in evidence that hunting is alive and well, in spite of it being illegal.

In 2004 many hunters signed a pledge to say they would keep hunting. Of course if asked out right today, they turn all shy and sheepish and protest to the almighty that they were only laying trails and somehow an unfortunate fox or deer managed to hurl itself into the jaws of their hounds quite by accident.

Even if the blighters are trail laying they still use fox scent, and the hounds are still trained to follow that scent. If accidental hunting is claimed, the police don’t ask for evidence of trail laying, or question why, if a trail was laid, it is purposefully laid near areas where foxes are known to be found.

We are informed with relentless monotony that to ban fox and other forms of hunting, is a breach of a hunter’s human rights, and we urban plebs, who are accused at the same time of being dirty benefit scroungers, don’t understand country ways, or how important killing animals is to the fabric of country life.

Like most rural equivalents of the urban myth, a Mori poll commissioned by the League Against Cruel Sports shows, 80% of us in town and country alike want to keep this nasty pastime banned for good.

The pros’ have tried to weaken the Act with a Statutory Instrument and they have even been to the European Court of Human Rights. All to no avail I’m happy to report.

The problems lie with the present pro-hunting Tory government who made a promise of a free vote on repeal before the end of Parliament. That is looking more and more unlikely now with only weeks to the General Election in 2015.

But another sneaky backdoor attempt cannot be totally ruled out, and one can be sure that those bloodthirsty fellows in the Countryside Alliance haven’t given up, and neither must we.

They are claiming that because of the recent failures of some prosecutions the Act is unworkable and should be scrapped.

On the 15th November 2014 we heard that all proceedings against the Devon and Somerset Staghounds huntsman Donald Summersgill and joint-masters David Greenwood and Rupert Andrews had been dropped. The three faced a total of four charges relating to alleged incidents of hunting with dogs on September 14 and October 24, 2013.

The League Against Cruel Sports brought video evidence that alleged illegal hunting was taking place, but the hunters claimed latterly that they had been carrying out research into deer health. This is allowed under the current legislation, as is accidental hunting and the flushing of a fox or deer to waiting guns.

This is not an isolated case, and whether it’s down to sympathetic police forces or magistrates who are unwilling or unable to interpret the law in favour of the hunted quarry, is any one’s guess.

Unfortunately, the wording can be open to malicious interpretation, and hunters and shooters are using the amendments (which were placed there by pro hunting MPs at the time of the original debate) to flout the Law.

No word is too small to escape their scrutiny, and what can be spun is spun in their attempts to pick the Law apart.

Lord Burns is frequently quoted as saying hunting is not cruel, and although he used those words, they were not in that order or with that meaning. The more sophisticated arguments come from the pro hunt Lawyers and a favourite at the moment is the exemption for carrying out research. (Although they are still not permitted to use a pack pf dogs.)

Enough is enough, and the animal charities agree it’s time to push for strengthening the current legislation to make it easier to take the law breakers to court and win.

The animal charities and lobby groups have joined forces and put forward some ideas for MPs. One of the biggest changes is a call for prison time and a criminal record for those who flout the Law. The LACS (League Against Cruel Sports) and POWA (Protect Our Wild Animals) want to see a 6 month sentence, but Fox in Parliament, a political animal lobby group, goes one better and calls for a 2-year mandatory prison sentence.

Hopefully with a change of government this year we will see some strong support for the hunting Act.

In the meantime we must continue to let our MPs know that hunting is a dinosaur and one we don’t want resurrected in our modern British Isles.

Resources:
http://www.powa.org.uk/news.html
https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/campaign-to-strengthen-the-hunting-act
http://www.league.org.uk/news-and-opinion/press-releases/2014/nov/league-calls-for-strengthening-of-hunting-act-on-10th-anniversary-to-stop-hunters-flouting-law
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1EtoolhbulE