Home > Blog

Blog

7th March 2017

Bucks-based Kimblewick Hunt Hounds Infected With Bovine Tuberculosis – OFFICIAL

Staff College & RMS Sandhurst Draghounds helping the Kimblewick Hunt out on 210217. This was the day when Hounds Off volunteers learnt that the Buckinghamshire-based Kimblewick Hunt hounds had been infected with bovine tuberculosis. Staff College & RMS Sandhurst Draghounds helping the Kimblewick Hunt out on 210217. This was the day when Hounds Off volunteers learnt that the Buckinghamshire-based Kimblewick Hunt hounds had been infected with bovine tuberculosis.

It has just been confirmed that the Kimblewick Hunt hounds have contracted bovine tuberculosis. Hounds Off now calls for the immediate blanket suspension of all hunting by all packs of hounds pending further information and enquiries.

That hunting with hounds poses a biosecurity risk, especially in relation to spreading bovine tuberculosis, comes as no surprise. We have been raising this issue for some time now. Confirmation that a pack of registered foxhounds in Buckinghamshire has contracted the disease should set alarm bells ringing. The question marks surrounding hunting and biosecurity, the risks which hunting with hounds pose to farm animal health, just got real and serious.

It is surely inconceivable that the self-styled “Guardians of the Countryside” can carry on like normal – or is it? As this scandal unfolds we will all be able to judge for ourselves who has the best interests of animal welfare and wildlife conservation at heart.

Hounds Off learned of the Kimblewick Hunt hounds contracting bovine tuberculosis on February 21st 2017. Here is how it happened:

Acting on information received, a small Hounds Off team recently monitored two meets of the Kimblewick Hunt in Berkshire near to where, last season, their hounds ran through a private garden. Our job was to protect this land forbidden to hunting.

On Valentines Day the meet was near Compton, a village not far from Junction 13 of the M4. It was a poorly attended hunt. We counted less than twenty riders, half a dozen car followers and three quad bikes. Twice hounds found a scent and went on cry, both times the chase ended inconclusively after five minutes with us in close attendance, cameras ready, at the sharp end. The second time hounds were running all over the road at Applepie Hill in a dodgy combination with narrow, undulating bends and fast traffic. They packed up mid afternoon and, from a monitoring perspective, we were pleased. The property we set out to protect was never in danger. One thing confused us though. The Kimblewick Hunt jacket is mustard coloured but the Huntsman on this day was wearing green. We asked around our contacts but nobody could explain.

On February 21 we returned to the Kimblewick who were hunting between Compton and Streatley. From the meet hounds took off after some deer, ran over the hills and far away. There was much hanging around and waiting. We were parked on a by-way near the village of Aldworth, watching through binoculars. A hunter wearing the Kimblewick mustard jacket disappeared after the hounds but the man in charge, the chap trying to gather hounds by calling with his voice and horn, was wearing green. Through the binos we recognised him from the week before.

Presently a blue Suzuki pulled up behind our vehicle and a lady hunt follower came over to say hello. Her name was Mary and we chatted. Mary was clearly unaware of who we were or why we were there. First thing we asked was who is the Huntsman wearing green? Mary informed us that he was Luke Chatfield from the Staff College & RMA Sandhurst Draghounds. Then she told us the reason why he was hunting and it was hard to believe!

According to Mary, the Kimblewick hounds had contracted bovine tuberculosis and the whole season “has been a write-off.” Their scheduled meets, she said, have been taken by visiting packs. On Feb 21 she said it should have been one of the Devon hunts but they pulled out at the last minute so the Draghounds, who are quite local anyway, filled in. Mary let slip that twenty-six of the Kimblewick hounds had been put down just last week.

Draghounds do genuinely hunt an artificial scent so we asked Mary what exactly was being hunted on this day; an artificial drag, fox-based trail or live quarry? She said that “accidents happen” and that she intended to stay out well into the afternoon. We know a bit about hunting and observed that things often hot up around 3pm. “Ah yes, the Three O’Clock Fox,” purred Mary with a knowing smile.

Mary said that the Duke of Beaufort Hunt was guesting on Saturday 25 Feb at Kingston Blount to finish this disastrous season, which normally runs into April. We chatted a bit more then, with the lull ongoing, she returned to sit in her car.

Efforts were still being made in the distance to gather scattered hounds and resume hunting. Presently an elderly chap walked into view and stopped to compare observations too. He was called John and, independently, confirmed that the Kimblewick hounds had contracted bovine tuberculosis. He said how they contracted bTB was “a mystery” but reckoned the “Ministry” were looking in to it.

“It’s all new,” conceded John, “the first time ever.”

Realising the profound implications for hunting if what we had just been told was officially confirmed but playing it cool, we talked about the poor show so far and wondered why the hounds were allowed to get away on the deer. Then John walked to Mary’s car and they wagged chins for a bit.

After that we were pleased to confirm that it was genuine draghunting, not fox hunting, which ensued. Apart from a dodgy five minutes when we were surrounded by estate workers, lads on quad bikes and one who sat on our bonnet to obstruct legitimate passage along a by-way (which diffused when an actual by-way sign right next to us was pointed out), it was all very half-hearted.

Immediately after the hunt had finished we put in a Freedom Of Information request to DEFRA regarding the Kimblewick revelations, then got stuck in to investigating. We soon discovered that in 2011 Irish hunting hounds were found to have been found infected with bTB.

Three days later, on Friday February 24, Hounds Off received information of an anonymous email sent to an anti hunting campaign group which, we were told, contained three salient points:

1. The Kimblewick Hunt hounds contracted bTB from eating infected cattle flesh.
2. 40 hounds have been destroyed in the last 10 days.
3. The Masters Of Foxhounds Association (MFHA) is covering the whole thing up.

Since then we have worked with the League Against Cruel Sports and Daily Mirror journalist Ben Glaze to verify as much of the above as possible. This is not our ‘story’ nor theirs. It belongs to all of us who care about wildlife conservation and animal welfare. If you are reading this and have a question, ask it. One thing is for certain – there is much more which remains unclear and needs to be found out!

© Joe Hashman

Staff College & RMS Sandhurst Draghounds helping the Kimblewick Hunt out on 210217. This was the day when Hounds Off volunteers learnt that the Buckinghamshire-based Kimblewick Hunt hounds had been infected with bovine tuberculosis.

Staff College & RMS Sandhurst Draghounds helping the Kimblewick Hunt out on 210217. This was the day when Hounds Off volunteers learnt that the Buckinghamshire-based Kimblewick Hunt hounds had been infected with bovine tuberculosis.

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Share this page:

5 Comments | Leave a comment

28th February 2017

Calling Residents Of Penningtons Lane, Macclesfield & Surrounding Area

Huntsman gathers hounds from private gardens on Penningtons Lane, Macclesfield, Cheshire 25.02.17 Huntsman gathers hounds from private gardens on Penningtons Lane, Macclesfield, Cheshire 25.02.17

You may have read seen the news from last Saturday of hunters and a pack of hounds chasing a fox from open countryside into the edge of town, trashing property and gardens, then cornering the exhausted creature and biting it to death in a private back garden with the shocked residents terrified, upset and powerless to do anything? If not, read it here or watch it here.

I’m glad there were no Saboteurs or Monitors out with the Cheshire Forest Hunt on Saturday 25th February because you can be certain that, had there been, they would have been blamed for the pandemonium caused by the unspeakable in pursuit of the uneatable. As it is, the hunters cannot shift responsibility for hunting a terrified fox which sought sanctuary in the gardens and patios of a residential street on the edge of Macclesfield. Even before that fox was caught and killed the shocking reality of foxhunting was laid bare. Well done to everyone who has spoken up and not swept this outrageous animal abuse under the carpet.

Incidents like this have happened before and experience suggests will happen again. We will have to wait and see if Cheshire Police have the appetite to meaningfully investigate Saturdays events but whatever happens there is positive, practical action which every resident of Penningtons Lane can take to stop hunting in the future and it is this: make your farm, field or garden a hunt-free zone by following the simple Hounds Off formulas here.

DO ‘HOUNDS OFF’ IN CHESHIRE

Hounds Off exists precisely to support and advise anyone who wants to protect their property from hunt trespass. This website is a resource so please use it. Employ the Cost & Hassle Free Option for Warning Off your local hunt, or the Belt & Braces Approach if you want to be doubly sure. If anything at any stage is unclear then contact the Hounds Off team direct and we will help – that’s what we do.

If you live on or around Penningtons Lane, Macclesfield, Cheshire (or know someone who does) please forward this blog to them and encourage them to warn the Cheshire Forest Hunt off their property.

DO ‘HOUNDS OFF’ ANYWHERE

In fact, wherever you are you can do this. There are at least 200 hunts in the UK and we suspect most of them to be engaged in illegal activity. We know that if you want to keep hounds off our wildlife, Hounds Off really works.

© Joe Hashman

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Share this page:

13 Comments | Leave a comment

11th January 2017

The £5 Money Shot – Making Evidence Of Illegal Hunting Count

Cheshire Forest Huntsman being questioned by police, 2nd January 2017. Photo credit: Cheshire Monitors Cheshire Forest Huntsman being questioned by police, 2nd January 2017. Photo credit: Cheshire Monitors

Did you hear about the bang-to-rights evidence of illegal hunting which the police and/or CPS weren’t interested in? Apparently it happens all the time…

It’s beyond doubt that there’s an institutional disinterest in Hunting Act cases and the authorities seek any excuse not to proceed with matters. In court, experience shows Defence teams seizing any opportunity to subvert evidence or witnesses against them. If you want your evidence to withstand close and vindictive scrutiny you need The Money Shot and, for fox sake, make it a £5er;

£1; The fox (hare, deer or mink) fleeing….

With no quarry in the frame, the Defense will argue that there is no chasing of a live animal. Establish the identity of the quarry species with your camera. You’ll need much more than film of fleeing quarry to get the offenders into court but without this you have nothing.

£2; …being chased by a pack of hounds….

A kill is not essential for an offence to be committed under the Hunting Act (2004). Chasing with dogs is illegal. Once evidence of the quarry has been secured, pan back to the hounds to show what they’re doing and how many are involved.

£3; …in view of the Huntsman or Whipper-In….

These days hounds are often allowed to range way ahead of the Huntsman. If quarry is found and chased then those responsible can claim to either not know or that it was an “accident”. Evidence which shows somebody in charge of the hounds was well able to view events makes it harder to cry “accident”.

£4; …who is not trying to stop them….

Film the behaviour of anyone at the scene including body gestures (such as pointing) and any use of horn and voice. “Accident” is far less plausible if hunt staff can be shown to have done nothing to stop the hounds. If hunt staff are filmed actively encouraging the chase (such as by cheering hounds on or doubling the horn), or by taking and acting upon information communicated to them by others then even better. This will show an intent to break the law which is hard to deny.

£5; …for a considerable time or distance.

It’s not possible to state what constitutes “considerable” but obviously the longer the chase goes on with nothing being done to stop it, the stronger the evidence of illegal hunting being an intentional thing.

Identification

When filming either Huntsman or Whipper-In take the earliest opportunity to zoom in as close as possible because identification is absolutely essential for proving who did what. Hunting Act cases will fail due to weak ident even if the actual illegal hunting is obvious. These days hunt staff often wear anonymous matching jackets and ride horses with similar colouring and features; tactics which conspire to make evidence gathering even more difficult. The smallest detail could be a clincher so be alert to capturing on film anything, anything, which could help with positive identification.

Other things: keep cameras running as long as possible; use GPS readings to verify time, date, location; don’t commentate or remonstrate whilst filming (bite your tongue if you have to – let your film do the talking); guard good evidence with your life until instructed otherwise by a professional person you trust.

The £5 Money Shot is intended to provide helpful guidance for property owners and individuals involved with law enforcement. It’s one of many wider conversations around the Hunting Act (2004). If  further debate and discussion about evidence gathering of illegal hunting is prompted then good. If anyone finds it useful, applies it in the field and succeeds in court then even better!

Recommended further research:

The Hunting Act, a website for enforcement professionals
Trail Of Lies Report by IFAW and explanation of the false alibi of ‘trail hunting’

© Joe Hashman
Founder, Hounds Off

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Share this page:

8 Comments | Leave a comment

1st December 2016

The Devil’s In The Detail (But Who’s Looking?)

Evidence of illegal hare hunting by the Easton Harriers. Photo courtesy Norfolk/Suffolk Hunt Saboteurs Evidence of illegal hare hunting by the Easton Harriers. Photo courtesy Norfolk/Suffolk Hunt Saboteurs

HUNT TRESPASS IN WILTSHIRE

A message came to Hounds Off that hare hunting beagles breached a fence and ran into a Wiltshire garden last Saturday. Apparently the Hunt Master muttered an excuse about hunting “wounded hares”. Our Wiltshire contact said she thought hunting with dogs was banned. Something about the wounded hare excuse just didn’t ring true to us either. We asked a friend for his thoughts. He pinged them back to us in quick time.

Under the Hunting Act, there is an Exemption that allows hunting an injured hare lawfully, “for the purpose of relieving the wild mammal’s suffering” (1). However, and these are salient points in this instance, no more than two dogs may be used (2), it’s done on permitted land only (3) and the dogs must be kept under control (4).

We already know a pack was used, the hunters did not have permission to hunt in the garden and clearly they were running out of control when they did. Illegal, doncha think?

Our friend reckoned that the trespass aspect was interesting too. If the beaglers were claiming the wounded hare Exemption then they must admit to having control of their hounds – which makes the trespass deliberate. Getting to the truth would help our Wiltshire contacts should they take civil action to protect their property in future.

And here’s the frustrating bit. Why do we have to resort to civil actions? Whichever way you look at it, in 2016 hunt trespass isn’t something the anti hunting rural dweller should have to endure.

EVIDENCE OF ILLEGAL HUNTING IN SUFFOLK

As to what’s occurring with recent and ongoing allegations of illegal hare hunting in Suffolk, you might well despair. Compelling evidence gathered by Norfolk/Suffolk Hunt Saboteurs raises serious questions about the Easton Harriers and their hunting activities. Their false alibi is tenuous too. Are they claiming “rabbit hunting” or, like the Wiltshire beaglers, going after wounded hares (BBC Suffolk News online, 29 November 2016, see below)?

IMG_4073

Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-38146564

When Brian May tweeted that Law and Order had broken down in Suffolk, he joined a chorus calling out the blatantly obvious. We all hope the police and prosecuting authorities find a hitherto vacant will (and the expertise) to fully and forensically investigate these allegations of illegal hunting.

Two facts we suggest that detectives unpick early on:

1/ The dogs used are purpose-bred, specialist hare hunting hounds (ie harriers).

2/ The habitat and habits of hares and rabbits differ in basic ways which make it easy to establish what is the true quarry just by simple observation.

If, under proper scrutiny, the Easton Harriers claim the wounded hare Exemption then immediately they are guilty of illegal hunting for running more than two hounds. We could go on…

Assistant Chief Constable Rachel Kearton of Suffolk Police has appealed for information and background intelligence. We ask her to treat this blog as both, take it seriously and positively investigate. Honestly, you don’t have to be a rocket scientist to work this all out!

REFERENCES

(1) Hunting Act (2004), Schedule 1 Exempt Hunting, 8 (3).
(2) Hunting Act (2004), Schedule 1 Exempt Hunting, 8 (4).
(3) Hunting Act (2004), Schedule 1 Exempt Hunting, 8 (6) (b).
(4) Hunting Act (2004), Schedule 1 Exempt Hunting, 8 (7) (b).

ACTION TO TAKE

Request Suffolk Police investigate allegations of illegal hunting by the Easton Harriers, here

Contact Suffolk Police & Crime Commissioner Tim Passmore with your concerns, here

Make your property into a nature reserve from which hunting is forbidden, here

Write to your MP and ask them to support the Hunting Act (2004), here

IMG_4072

© Joe Hashman

Tags: , , , , , ,

Share this page:

4 Comments | Leave a comment

5th November 2016

One Landowners Ongoing Struggle To Keep Hounds Off His Land

Foxhounds running out of control across roads and gardens in Childe Okeford, near Sturminster Newton, Dorset, 5 Nov 2016. Foxhounds running out of control across roads and gardens in Childe Okeford, near Sturminster Newton, Dorset, 5 Nov 2016.

Hounds Off exists because words from hunters can rarely be trusted. And so it is that, for decades sometimes, people are negatively affected by hunt trespass. The thread reproduced here tells the tale of one landowner who has sought to protect his property, livestock and pets since well before we struck up a friendship in 2010.

—-Original message—-
From : *****
Date : 04/11/2016 – 08:23 (GMTST)
To : *****@*****.PNN.Police.uk
Subject : Re: RE: RE: ***** Hunt NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED

*****,

Thank you for what you have tried to do on our behalf and that of our livestock.

I am sure that when you are out of uniform, at home with your family, your view on this matter, where one section of the community can, in the pursuit of their own questionable, often illegal, enjoyment, trample over the lives, livelihood and livestock of the elderly, in-firmed, vulnerable and exposed, seemingly without laws to stop them, may be different.

The Police and Crime Commissioner was very interested in our plight last year and I shall be contacting him.

All the best,

*****

—-Original message—-
From : *****@*****.PNN.Police.uk
Date : 03/11/2016 – 17:30 (GMTST)
To : *****
Cc : *****@*****.PNN.Police.uk
Subject : RE: RE: ***** Hunt NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED

*****
I have spoken today with the master of the ***** hunt and again re-iterated your concerns. The master stated that they would endeavour to do as they did towards the end of last season and try and keep away from the boundary to your property and place personnel to contain the hounds. Unfortunately as the hunt has permission to use the land adjoining yours there is very little that can be done to stop them.
I am not on duty on Saturday (05/11/2016) when the hunt should next be in your area but I have asked PC***** to visit you and monitor the hunts activities. Should you see anything that you believe is illegal or in relation to illegal activity please call it in and PC***** will hopefully be able to attend and investigate.
I am sorry that there is not anything more I can do but we will continue to monitor the situation and deal with any issues that arise as best we can.
Regards
PC*****
***** Rural Neighbourhood Policing Team Officer

From: *****
Sent: 29 October 2016 11:09
To: *****@*****.PNN.Police.uk
Subject: Re: RE: ***** Hunt NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED

Thank you, *****, for your reply to my email of 12 October.

I see that you had the meeting with the ***** Hunt master and that he said that the ***** Hunt will endeavour to do as “they did towards the end of last season.”

The hunting starts today and next Saturday will be the anniversary of the horrendous trespass, harassment and distress to livestock inflicted on us. Comprehensive details of this together with maps were forwarded to yourselves at ***** Police and to the Police and Crime Commissioner. Prior to last years events, the master of the ***** had given an undertaking to stay a fields distance away from us. In the event he led a triumphal parade along our boundary and later led the field to hunt ***** Copse right up to our boundary. It was only after 7th November that he maintained a fields distance away and we suffered no harassment.

Your email 13/10/2016 says that your “understanding is that the ***** Hunt will endeavour to do as they did towards the end of last season” – a fields distance away from us. Despite this assurance on 8th October just gone, the master of the ***** led the hunt into the field next to us, a distance of 50 m away from our livestock. (There is no doubt in my mind that a fox is released in ***** copse which is then chased. There is a high probability that this animal will chose to enter our land, through our flock with hounds following.) On that occasion it was ***** and I recording events that prevented the terrier man entering the copse to release the fox and the field trooped off back to ***** Farm.

Last year, *****, I made the point that ***** Farm where we live seems not to be a part of *****, where the laws on harassment and animal welfare don’t apply, where the ***** Hunt in pursuit of its own pleasure ride rough-shod over the elderly, weak, and vunerable having done so over a period of in excess of two decades and there’s none to prevent them. I said to you that I believed that the powers of ***** Police did not extend to us and, on that occasion, you corrected me. But yet again they’ve given an assurance to you which has proved to be utterly without foundation. They have no intention of abiding by a fields distance away.

Quite honestly, we are desperate for some peace in our lives without being terrorised by the ***** on a yearly basis.

Sorry to sound so gloomy, *****. Nothing personal; towards us you’ve always been a good and even-handed policeman. But it does seem that the ***** Hunt can can do just as it pleases and there is none to say nay.

—-Original message—-
From : *****@*****.PNN.Police.uk
Date : 13/10/2016 – 18:28 (GMTST)
To : *****
Subject : RE: ***** Hunt NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED

*****
Sorry for the delay in getting back to you I have been away on other wildlife related issues. We did have the meeting with the hunt masters and I have spoken with the Master of the ***** hunt in relation to you and your land. My understanding is that the ***** Hunt will endeavour to stay away from your land, as they did towards the end of last season. I will be speaking to the Master again shortly with regards to other matters and will re-iterate your position.
Again sorry for the delay in getting back to you
Regards
PC*****

From: *****
Sent: 12 October 2016 13:12
To: *****@*****.PNN.Police.uk
Subject: ***** Hunt

Dear *****,

On the last time we met we said that we’d be sending our customary letter to The ***** Hunt requesting them not to trespass on our land. We said we would send you a copy and that we would send one to Insp *****. You said that you would be meeting the hunt masters and inform us of the outcome as it affects us.
Last year the meeting was at the end of August

It has become urgent to know what the ***** intend. Please could you let us know.

Many thanks,

*****

 

Share this page:

6 Comments | Leave a comment

22nd October 2016

It’s Good To Talk

Debating fox hunting and the Hunting Act at The Game Fair 2016. Photo credit: Oli Melzack Debating fox hunting and the Hunting Act at The Game Fair 2016. Photo credit: Oli Melzack

From the moment we had a social media presence we’ve had trolls. Online abuse is inevitable when you’re standing up to be counted. We don’t support it or partake. Hounds Off fundamentally disapproves of antisocial behaviour from anyone on any side.

We accept our own advice regarding trolls which is to, with a very rare exception, ignore them. That’s why their type always quieten down and, mostly, go away.

SPREADING FOXY LOVE

The news is often appalling. Human beings can inflict the most heinous crimes against their kind and fellow creatures. God knows, often the horror is very hard to understand or absorb. However incensed or outraged, we encourage folks in our Hounds Off community to spread foxy love instead.

To achieve the dream, foxy love must reach beyond its comfort zone and into what might be described as enemy territory. Foxy love seeks also to find common ground with people who, by whatever inclination, are practitioners of or apologists for foxy hate – folks who are not our natural bedfellows. That’s why it was great to represent Hounds Off in a debate about fox hunting and the Hunting Act at The Game Fair in July. There’s no doubt that we challenged negative stereotypes and made a few die-hard hunt supporters think, however briefly, about the cruelty which is central to the pleasure they feel from participating in ‘country sports’.

We advertised our attendance in advance so that all our trolls were informed and aware of their chance to discuss the rights and wrongs of killing for sport face to face and in the comfort of their home turf. For reasons known only to themselves, our trolls didn’t grasp their opportunity, or if they did decided to keep quiet.

NO-PLATFORM ATTEMPT

A year ago Hounds Off was represented at the Winchester Hunting Symposium. There were all sorts of smear campaigns from hunt supporters beforehand. One of our then-regular trolls even published a rubbishing blog full of lies and misinformation designed to scupper the event (it has since been removed). Additionally, as the Hounds Off representative, I was personally besmirched and accused of supporting violent protest. A pro hunt MP threatened to pull out of participating if I was given a voice. I had to answer to the organiser and he then justified my attendance to Winchester University elders who decided the outcome of this no-platform attempt. We took it as complimentary when the Countryside Alliance joined in.

It’s good to have a voice and be listened to. Hounds Off attended the Winchester Hunting Symposium and, on behalf of hunted animals, our voice was heard.

DORSET DING-DONG

Recently we had a little ding-dong in the Dorset press about the seldom-mentioned issue of Hunts killing healthy but unwanted surplus hounds. For whatever reason, the Blackmore Vale Magazine Editor closed correspondence having given a hound-killing apologist the last, and inaccurate, word.

We used our social media platforms to keep this issue alive and it was latched on to by a troll who, evidently spoiling for an online argument, was particularly prolific about a month ago.

Our troll had been sprinkling mischief here and there. We monitored his presence discreetly but, as stated earlier, are not in the habit of censoring comments. After all, it’s good to talk.

Eventually our troll settled down into a dialogue with a Hounds Off supporter and the nitty-gritty realities of trailhunting aka foxhunting.

PSEUDO-SCIENCE

Eventually, playing his believed trump card, our troll posted a link to the Veterinary Association for Wildlife Management (VAWM). The VAWM works towards repeal of the Hunting Act by employing lengthy, convoluted and twisted interpretations of pseudo-science to, incredibly, justify bloodsports. When you hear the likes of Conservative Party Environment Secretary Angela Leadsom say that hunting with hounds is good for animal welfare, this is where she gets her stuff.

Although superficially persuasive, we encourage all who are tempted to look a little deeper and read between the lines. VAWM arguments in support of bloodsports are fatally flawed.

COMMUNICATING & BEING HEARD

It’s good to have a voice, to talk, to be listened to. Via our website and social media platforms, Hounds Off continues spreading news, views and foxy love, giving all-comers a safe place to express themselves and censoring rarely.

In solidarity with people who wish to protect their property, livestock and pets from hunt trespass, we offer ongoing support, help, advice and back-up.

In defence of the Hunting Act 2004, Hounds Off will carry on deconstructing the propaganda and exposing the lies of bloodsports apologists who have yet to accept that the cruel pastimes of hunting wild animals with dogs for sport have been ruled as socially unacceptable.

© Joe Hashman

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Share this page:

9 Comments | Leave a comment

29th August 2016

Make Friends, Save Lives & Influence People

The Hounds Off way of thinking is based on decades of experience. It's realistic and doable.  This diagram shows how it can work (there are other ways). Use in conjunction with the resources on www.houndsoff.co.uk The Hounds Off way of thinking is based on decades of experience. It's realistic and doable. This diagram shows how it can work (there are other ways). Use in conjunction with the resources on www.houndsoff.co.uk

In Spring 2010 a Tory landslide seemed imminent and, naturally, fears about the future of the Hunting Act occupied much of my mind. The challenge was (and remains) to find a way to stop hunting which can be effective regardless of what the law says. What became Hounds Off was an idea. Or rather, a collection of ideas.

THE IMPORTANCE OF ‘COUNTRY’

The hunting community knows full well that having land to tally-ho over is essential. “Country” (as they call it) is central to everything they do and having access to it is jealously guarded. Despite hunting with hounds truly being a minority pastime, the unspeakable minority operates a well oiled machine which facilitates their animal abuses of choice even though technically they’re outlawed.

AN IDEA…

Back to the idea.

Hounds Off Our Wildlife“. The Hunt Saboteurs Association (HSA) used to have a black and white poster with those words on complete with images of deer, fox, hare and otter. It was straight-forward and simple poster but struck a chord the first time I saw it.

Hounds Off Our Wildlife“. That’s HOWL, the radical, informative, inspirational, ground-breaking, often entertaining voice of the HSA.

Hounds Off Our Wildlife. Hounds Off. This is what we want. Short, sharp, to the point. Does what it says on the tin, kind of thing. Did the HSA object? I asked the Committee. “No,” they said. “Carry on.”

CREATING HUNT-FREE ZONES

After quite a lot of meetings with colleagues and close friends it was decided that a website would be the best vehicle for delivering the Hounds Off message. Our plan was (and remains) to create as many No Hunting nature reserves as possible, including all sorts of land; from whole estates and farms to smallholdings and back yards. We wanted easy, universal access to the information needed to do this effectively, autonomously and with no-strings. The Internet provides an ideal platform and so www.houndsoff.co.uk was born.

The concept of creating hunt-free zones is not new. The League Against Cruel Sports started buying sanctuary land in the West Country in the 1950’s, principally to disrupt staghunting. The counter-concept of preserving hunting rights had earlier seen the formation of companies who sole purpose was to support bloodsports. In reality, Royalty has been dictating over hunting preserves for centuries. Today a whole structure exists to exert the power and control of that influential, criminal minority who like to hunt. Not everybody knows about this ‘system’ but it’s real. Anyone who has crossed their line knows about it, that’s for sure; the bullying, the ostracising, the undermining, the dismissing, the evicting. Rural peer pressure can be intense.

TOOL IN YOUR KITBAG

So where does Hounds Off come in? Well, Hounds Off empowers people. We will stand with anyone affected by hunt trespass (or the threat of it). Our motto is, “You Are Not Alone”. www.houndsoff.co.uk provides the information and tools needed to protect property, livestock and pets. Alongside bringing together a community of related minds to stand united on this issue in real life and via social media, the aims and objectives of Hounds Off today genuinely are as simple as this. Looking to the future, if you believe as we do that “available country” is a major factor in deciding whether or not a Hunt can exist, then squeezing them in that area makes perfect sense.

For Hunt Sabs, Monitors and other front-line campaigners, Hounds Off is another tool in your kitbag which can be used to scupper bloodsports and save lives. You’re meeting the outraged public, disgruntled locals, beleaguered landowners and farmers who have had enough. Please use www.houndsoff.co.uk as a resource where you can suggest folk go to find support and solutions to the problem of hunt trespass. The Action & Advice pages (Warn Off Your Local Hunt) are especially crucial!

IT’S SERIOUS!

Last autumn I was working in a wood which belongs to a Hounds Off landowner. One of my fellow volunteers told me he was living off-grid in a bender under a hedge on land owned by friends who were new to the area. The local Hunt had run their hounds through his encampment and the new owners could do nothing to prevent it. Turns out that, deep within the conditions of sale, rights to hunt over that land were protected. You can be sure similar arrangements are being made elsewhere. Aside from ongoing efforts to repeal the law, I’ve no doubt that anything and everything which could obstruct hunting in the future is being ‘dealt with’ or neutralised, often quietly and behind the scenes. This includes ensuring access to as much land as possible via sporting rights, deeds and covenants. Remember, without available country any Hunt is knackered.

HOUNDS OFF IN ACTION

The best thing we can tell you is that, since launching in September 2010, Hounds Off has helped folk across the UK and thousands of new acres of hunt-free land has been established. Where hunt-related problems persist so our support remains ongoing. The Hounds Off philosophy is simple and based on people power. Hounds Off is about being strong at our roots, resolute, standing with our friends united and, yes, these tactics are effective!

Have a look at the accompanying diagram called “How To Make Friends & Influence People”. It’s not theory – it comes from real-life experiences of how Hounds Off is working on the ground and shows how cultivating relationships between Sabs, Monitors and the public can benefit us all, including (most importantly) abused wildlife. See what you think and how you could make it relevant for your situation. Most importantly, personalise it. Make Hounds Off your own and www.houndsoff.co.uk an asset which you use.

© Joe Hashman

Feel free to reproduce appropriately and, please, always with a link to www.houndsoff.co.uk

This blog first appeared in April 2016 on the Accidental Activist website, More Than Just Badgers, and was entitled, Squeeze Them In The Country.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Share this page:

0 Comments | Be the first to comment >

11th August 2016

They Love Their Hounds, Don’t They?

Cheshire Foxhound shot October 30th 1996 Cheshire Foxhound shot October 30th 1996

We are told that it’s common practice for foxhounds belonging to registered Hunts to be killed off after a working life of six or seven years. Indeed, the Countryside Alliance estimated that 3000 foxhounds are destroyed in this way every year (1). That’s a lot of dead dogs but we suggest this figure is a gross underestimate of the true numbers of hounds which are bred by Hunts but become surplus to requirements.

PUPPIES

For starters, the Countryside Alliance estimate only accounted for retiring foxhounds. No mention is made of the hundreds-if-not-thousands of puppies produced by Hunts in their annual quest to improve the performance of foxhounds by selective breeding. We don’t have any statistics on how many bitches are used, on average, as breeding stock per Hunt each year, but we do know that a bitch may produce ten or more puppies. Apparently seven is considered enough for one bitch so from the start excess puppies may be put down at birth (2).

LOOKING THE PART

Conformation is crucial too. The Foxhound Kennel Stud Book stipulates the desirable shape and structure of a hound from aesthetic and performance perspectives. Many aesthetic features are condemned; including curly tails, upper or lower jaws which protrude noticeably, elbows which stick out or a narrow back (3).

ABILITY TO HUNT

For a foxhound, performance means having a sharp sense of smell, stamina, a good bark and the right temperament for working in a pack. This is all observed and finely tuned during late summer and autumn hound exercise (formerly called, more honestly, Cub Hunting). By the time of the Opening Meets and the full season proper, only the best hounds will have made the grade. For example, ‘babblers’ (hounds which bark when they smell an animal other than fox and so mislead the others) and ‘skirters’ (hounds that cut corners instead of sticking precisely to a scent) are disruptive and seldom tolerated. As former Horse & Hound editor Michael Clayton writes in his 1989 Modern Guide to Foxhunting, “It may well be necessary to eliminate from the pack hounds notably guilty of these misdemeanours.”

DELIBERATELY UNDERESTIMATING?

Now consider that the 2015/16 season Hunting Special edition of Horse & Hound detailed 293 registered Hunts in England, Wales and Scotland which are breeding, drafting and retiring hounds to maintain their ‘sport’ year in year out – 186 registered packs of foxhounds, 17 harrier packs (chasing foxes and/or hares), 60 beagle packs (hare), 8 basset packs (hare), 19 mink hunts and 3 stag hunts.

The Countryside Alliance estimate of 3000 hounds killed at the end of their working lives was only based on about 200 Hunts registered with the Masters of Fox Hounds Association. It took no account of the other hare, mink and deer hunts which have their own separate Associations. Neither did it account for those young hounds which look wrong or are not deemed good enough to make the cut. That’s why we believe that the Countryside Alliance figure was way below the real tally.

FROM THE HORSES MOUTH

As a late Twentieth Century foxhunting and hound breeding legend, the 10th Duke of Beaufort, is quoted by Clayton in his Modern Guide:

“Lord Henry Bentinck … said that the secret of his success was to breed a great many hounds, and then to put down a great many.

“If you can follow his example so much the better for the future of your pack…”

SHIFTING RESPONSIBILITY

A major claim made by those who lobbied against the Hunting Act was that up to 20 000 hounds would have to be destroyed if hunting was banned (4). We know that this threatened mass execution didn’t happen because Hunts tweaked their mode of operation to circumvent the law then carried on regardless.

AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH

However, in the eleven years since the Hunting Act came into force, based on that Countryside Alliance estimate, 33 000 foxhounds will have been killed for being too old. Even if you don’t count those overlooked foxhound puppies, the beagles, bassets, minkhounds and the staghounds, so-called ‘country sports’ are still responsible for one heck of a pile of dead dogs.

(1) & (4) Report of Committee of Enquiry into Hunting with Dogs in England & Wales (Lord Burns & Others), The Stationary Office, 2000. Point 6.79.
(2) The Chase – A Modern Guide to Foxhunting (Clayton), Stanley Paul & Co. Ltd, 1989. Page 50.
(3) The Chase – A Modern Guide to Foxhunting (Clayton), Stanley Paul & Co. Ltd, 1989. Page 45/46.

Read The Daily Mirror expose (14 July 2015); Thousands of healthy foxhounds – including pups – are clubbed to death or shot if they’re ‘unsuitable’, here.

© Joe Hashman

Share this page:

31 Comments | Leave a comment

30th July 2016

Hounds Off at The Game Fair 2016

Foxhunting & the Hunting Act 2004 were debated at The Game Fair by Hounds Off, League Against Cruel Sports, Countryside Alliance, Veterinary Association for Wildlife Management & the assembled audience. Foxhunting & the Hunting Act 2004 were debated at The Game Fair by Hounds Off, League Against Cruel Sports, Countryside Alliance, Veterinary Association for Wildlife Management & the assembled audience.

Hounds Off Founder Joe Hashman reports from The Game Fair at Ragley Hall in Warwickshire.

It’s good to talk. Receiving an invite to debate Hunting Act rights and wrongs at the biggest fieldsports show of the year was not what we expected, but the opportunity came and was seized. We figured that appealing to the better nature of hunting folk could only be productive, especially if misinformation and negative stereotypes were exploded at the same time.

In favour of bloodsports were the Countryside Alliance and Veterinary Association for Wildlife Management. Shining a light for compassion, progressive and civilised behaviour were Robbie Marsland, Director of the League Against Cruel Sports (Scotland) and myself. Before taking questions we were each given ten minutes to hold the floor. On behalf of Hounds Off, this is what I said;

I’ve known enough of you over the years to realise that many of you are decent human beings. I know you love your families, your animals, your countryside. So someone like me, who feels profoundly upset by the suffering inflicted on wild animals when being hunted by hounds, simply doesn’t understand how you can’t feel it too. Because I know, apart from a handful of phsycopaths who sadly do love the blood and power, that most of you are not bad people.

Hunting literature tells us that fallow deer, chased by the New Forest Buckhounds until 1997, were never attacked by dogs at the conclusion of a hunt. I found it hard to believe but at the time had no evidence to the contrary. So, with others, I attended most Buckhound meets in the Forest for five years from 1992.

Repeatedly, we filmed deliberately protracted chases lasting for many hours. We got footage of deer being savaged by hounds, wrestled to the ground by hunt supporters, held underwater and half drowned. We proved that the public face of this centuries old tradition and its private reality were indeed two different things. Thankfully, the Buckhounds disbanded 19 years ago.

Even today, foxhunting literature claims that foxes were hunted “in their wild and natural state.” It sounds fair, reasonable even. But that was not the case on Boxing Day 1982 when, for the first time in my life, I attended a hunt. It was the Old Berkshire at Wantage in my home county. Towards the end of day, in a field corner near Denchworth, a couple of blokes with terrier and spades stuck their dog down a hole and, as if by magic, bolted a fox. There was no chase beforehand, hounds did not mark to ground. It just happened that the pack and mounted field were waiting patiently close by while the terriermen did their work. When their fox was running in the open and in full view, the Huntsman let his hounds go.

I revisited that field corner and found an artificial earth. It conformed with what I’d read about in a book on foxhunting by the 10th Duke of Beaufort. I still can’t get my head around why decent people would think that it could ever be okay to capture, imprison and then make a fox run for its life in front of a pack of dogs. Even if you think you know the answer, ask yourself; what is that really about?

In November 1996, The Cumberland & Westmorland Herald reported a meet of the Ullswater Foxhounds at Dockray. One fox was marked to ground, bolted with terriers then chased by hounds on four occasions before being dug out and killed the fifth time it sought sanctuary underground. The fifth time. If that’s not animal cruelty for sport, then what is it?

Anyone who’s been hare coursing knows that hares in pain cry like a human infant. You too may have witnessed greyhounds with their teeth clamped around the bodies and limbs of live hares whilst pulling them in opposite directions like a living tug o war rope. It frequently took minutes before lumbering humans prized the hare out of their dogs mouths and delivered a neck-snapping coupe de gras. In hare coursing the fabled “quick nip to the back of the neck” was a deliberate untruth promoted to defend the indefensible.

Why would anyone want do this, especially to a hare, and for amusement? No wonder that the National Coursing Club issued guidance for spectators not to identify with the hare. Thank goodness that the Hunting Act 2004 genuinely has ended the abomination of organised club coursing, and successive court cases have made it crystal clear that using live hares as a competitive lure for running dogs is an offence.

And what about the Hunting Act? In some areas, and with certain offences like hare coursing, it is employed well. But, as many of us know, for hunting with scent hounds, enforcement is proving much more difficult. In many ways, I have to salute the organised, determined, campaign of resistance waged by the hunting community.

However, I’m with Judge Pert. In the 2011 case of Hopkins and Allen, he perceptively described two convicted members of the Fernie Hunt of using the cover of trail hunting as a cynical subterfuge to create a false alibi for illegal, live animal hunting.

I’d suggest that Hunts circumvent the Law in other ways too.

On Saturday 17 February 2007 I followed a joint meet of the Croome & West Warwickshire and the Radnor & West Herefordshire Hunts. That day they were nudging and winking at the Falconry exemption under Schedule 1 of the Hunting Act 2004. In reality, aside from minor cosmetic changes, I observed them to be foxhunting in the same way as it existed pre ban.

At ten-to-three, Huntsman and hounds were at a place near Upton Snodsbury known locally as Ken’s Orchard. I was chatty with the man in charge of a golden eagle that day. “It doesn’t hold as well as it used to because Ken died and he doesn’t feed them anymore,” the birdman said.

We were parked on the verge amongst hunt followers, watching. Presently a terrierman went on foot into a bit of rough just off the road. He had a poke around, warned us not to make too much noise, then got on a walkie-talkie and said, “Come up the track, turn left, put them in to the brambles on the right.”

Huntsman and hounds appeared from Ken’s Orchard and did as instructed. Within seconds a fox shot out and took the main body of the pack south-west. Simultaneously another fox ran out on the north side and, with hounds almost on top of him from the start, was devastated at the first fence which he couldn’t get through in time.

The car followers around me loved all this and there was much excitement and laughter about “another accident.” The birdman, who witnessed everything, had made no attempt to even get the golden eagle out of its box. In shared post-kill pleasure, which obviously I was faking, we joked about his inaction while the tattered-rag-of-a-fox was stuffed in a bin bag and taken away on the back of a quad bike.

Most people do not support bloodsports. This applies in rural areas as much as in towns and cities. To be honest, rural opposition to hunting doesn’t surprise me because it’s here, in the countryside, where ordinary people are personally affected by hunt trespass, the chaos that goes with it, and the fear of sometimes serious repercussions if they make their true feelings known by simply saying “No Hunting”.

I set up Hounds Off six years ago to support those people. Today we support hundreds of folks who are fed up with the antisocial behaviour of Hunts that stick two fingers up at the compassionate majority; Hunts that continue to ride roughshod over their wishes, properties and the law of the land; Hunts that continue to chase and kill wildlife accidentally-on-purpose.

I am not an anti because I’m jealous; I would not want to be you. I’m anti hunting because I know that it is wrong to compromise the welfare of animals and, especially, it’s wrong to compromise their welfare for fun. And d’you know what, thankfully I’m not alone.

People who I talk to say that what they hate about bloodsports is the arrogance and sense of entitlement which many participants exhibit; in thinking that animal protection laws do not apply to them; in behaving like the countryside is their own private playground; in thinking that it is okay to inflict dangerous chaos and obstruction on others as they go about their daily business; and most of all, the arrogance of deliberately making hunted wildlife suffer for the sake of entertainment.

I’m really grateful to the organisers for inviting me to The Game Fair and thank them for giving me an opportunity to say this to you. I’d like to appeal to anyone here who has an open mind to open your heart as well and consider change. To you I’d say drop the cynical subterfuge, discard the false alibis, trail hunt lies and embrace country sports which don’t involve cruelty to animals. Drag Hunts and Bloodhound packs have been doing this for donkeys years. There are many ways to preserve the pomp, ceremony, employment, rural infrastructure and the thrill of the chase without forcing a wild animal to run for its life at the sharp end. This is the future and this, surely, has to be the way of a civilised, progressive society.

On behalf of the League Against Cruel Sports, Robbie shared some fair points and home truths too. Read his account of The Game Fair 2016 here.

© Joe Hashman

Share this page:

9 Comments | Leave a comment

9th June 2016

Mixing Up The Medicine – Trail Hunting & Biosecurity

Volunteers who vaccinate badgers against Bovine tuberculosis adhere to a strict biosecurity Code Of Conduct when accessing land or in contact with animals. Are so-called Trail Hunts so vigilant and does their activity compromise farm animal welfare? Here, volunteers on a Dorset farm prepare the medicine on vaccination morning. Volunteers who vaccinate badgers against Bovine tuberculosis adhere to a strict biosecurity Code Of Conduct when accessing land or in contact with animals. Are so-called Trail Hunts so vigilant and does their activity compromise farm animal welfare? Here, volunteers on a Dorset farm prepare the medicine on vaccination morning.

This is a serious question: Does so-called Trail Hunting compromise biosecurity on farms?

According to a 2014 government guidance document enitled ‘Disease prevention for livestock and poultry keepers’, some of the “main” ways in which farm animal and bird diseases are spread (and which in Italics we suggest are pertinent to Trail Hunting) include;

– animals moving between and within farms and, in particular, the introduction of new animals. Imported horses and dogs plus disturbed wildlife all move within and between farms during a days hunting.
– movement of people, especially workers, between and within farms. People follow hunting, sometimes in large numbers, and as they enjoy their days activity they move between and within farms.
– farm visitors – people, pets, equipment and vehicles. People, pets/working animals, equipment and vehicles are exactly what comprises a Hunt in the field.

Biosecurity measures suggested by DEFRA and APH, include;

– where possible, limit and control farm visitors – people and vehicles.
– have pressure washers, brushes, hoses, water and disinfectant available, and make sure visitors use them.
– clean and then disinfect any farm machinery/equipment if you are sharing these with a neighbouring farm.
– keep livestock away from freshly spread slurry.
– include signs directing visitors to the farmhouse/office and urging visitors not to feed animals or get in close contact.
– where possible a hard standing area away from livestock should be provided for visitors’ vehicles.
– consider offering protective clothing and footwear – Wellington boots are recommended because they are easy to clean and disinfect.

This is also a serious question:

Have you ever seen anybody pay heed to biosecurity or disinfect themselves/their tools of the trade when hunting across country from farm to farm?

Of all the farm animal diseases (of which there are many) Bovine tuberculosis (bTB) has occupied an enormous amount of debate, action and resources in recent years and continues to do so.

We know that bTB exists in wildlife populations as well as farm animals. According to DEFRA and APH, “Infected animals spread the disease mainly through coughing and sneezing. Bacteria are released into the air and inhaled by other animals in close contact.” We are told, in the same document, that the disease can also be spread, “through contaminated equipment, animal waste, feed and pasture.”

So-called Trail Hunting involves hordes of people on horseback, in vehicles and on foot with packs of hounds chasing their quarry from farm to farm, getting their sticky hands, feet, wheels, hooves and paws amongst all manner of livestock and into the dirtiest, darkest corners of the countryside.

According to DEFRA and APH, bTB prevention measures include the instruction to “Practice strict biosecurity” and this takes us back to the top of this blog.

So the original question, “Does so-called Trail Hunting compromise biosecurity on farms”, stands. We would be very interested to hear from anyone who can answer it with authority.

If you feel moved to ask DEFRA about any of the above then why not? They offer a range of contact options. You can Tweet them @DefraGovUK.

You could raise the matter with your MP too.

Help to stop the danger of spreading diseases by making where you live a No Hunting zone.

© Joe Hashman

Share this page:

8 Comments | Leave a comment