22nd August 2019
Fox Hunting On Forestry Commission Land, Continued…
Red fox. Photo: Tris Pearce
Jack Riggall writes:
With the 2019/20 fox hunting season now beginning I thought I’d reflect again on the Forestry Commission’s role in this. Throughout the previous hunting season, I was calling on the Forestry Commission to ban the fox hunts they licence (see here, here & here) leading to responses from DEFRA and Ian Gambles, the Forestry Commission’s CEO, on Mark Avery’s blog (see here). Both of these responses downplayed the criminality of hunting (or ignored it fully, in the case of DEFRA). Where hunt employees had wildlife crime convictions (such as the Cottesmore Hunt) these apparently are not grounds for refusing hunting licence applications, according to Ian Gambles.
One of the main points in Ian Gambles’ article about how proactive he considers the Forestry Commission to be on fox hunting is that:
- “Over the last three seasons we have: (1) suspended 2 hunts during our investigations of alleged breaches of permission; (2) refused a permission request due to previous trespass and (3) revoked a permission due to the hunt repeatedly going near a visitor site.”
Freedom of Information requests reveal more about these hunts.
- The two suspended were the Staintondale Hunt, who had their permission temporarily revoked for just one meet after killing a fox on Forestry Commission land, Sneaton Forest, on Tuesday 13th February 2018 (they were licensed again in the 2018/19 season, including for Sneaton Forest where they killed a fox) and the Derwent Hunt, who had their permission temporarily revoked for just one meet for hunting through a site where the Forestry Commission were working in the 2017/18 season. They were licensed again in the 2018/19 season.
- The hunt who, according to Ian Gambles’ had its permission request refused, was the Bilsdale Hunt. Curiously, the Forestry Commission’s letter to the hunt shows that due to the previous trespass referred to above they only had one meet refused whilst being approved for a number of other meets (‘refused a permission request’ is a pretty sneaky way for Ian Gambles’ to describe that one, and you guessed it, they were licensed in the 2018/19 season).
- Finally, the revoked permission was for the Cheshire Bloodhounds (who don’t hunt foxes).
The petition I started last year, which called for a full ban of fox hunts, actually had nothing to do with hunts who had agreements with the Forestry Commission under the Master of Bloodhounds & Draghounds Association, and was only calling for a ban of fox & hare hunts.
In short, the amount of fox hunts that have actually been banned by the Forestry Commission is zero.
The Forestry Commission met with the Master of Foxhounds Association on Thursday 15th August 2019 to update their agreement for yet another season of hunting on public land. They appear to have changed nothing in their endorsement of so-called ‘trail hunting’. But we can change that ourselves, even if only a little.
The Forestry Commission could at the very least show some transparency on hunting, as the National Trust began to do almost two years ago, and publish their hunting licences with maps & dates.
Given that the Executive Board of the Forestry Commission are meeting on 3rd September, now is a good time for everyone to sign this petition, and politely ask the Executive Board to commit to publishing these licences by emailing [email protected] . Remember to tell them that you’ve signed the petition!].
When you write to them, you can point out that:
- Ian Gambles has previously stated that “evidence should be given to one of our local offices if there is suspicion that someone may be breaking the terms or conditions of an agreement, permission or licence from the Forestry Commission.” The Forestry Commission itself provides no information at all on the written agreement with hunts, which hunts are licensed and which areas they are licensed for (unless forced to under the Freedom of Information Act 2000) and so we have no way of knowing if hunting licences are being breached!
- The Forestry Commission (a public department, by the way) is often subject to Freedom of Information requests over its licensing of hunting. This is clearly something the public are interested in and so the Forestry Commission should be more open about this activity without being made to by legal requests.
- The Forestry Commission’s ‘Transparency & Freedom of Information Releases’ includes none of the information relating to hunting previously requested on many occasions under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (such as the FoI requests referenced above and additional FoI requests asking for hunt meets) and so are not publicly available. Their explanation for this is that they only consider adding FoI requests to that transparency page if they’ve received three or more on the same subject. They’ve received more than three requests regarding fox hunting and so must have made a conscious decision to keep the information hidden.
Other wildlife campaigners elsewhere in the country are challenging the Forestry Commission on hunting.
- For example, in Gloucestershire where the Cotswold Vale Farmers Hunt are being challenged. A petition calling for this hunt to be banned from Forestry Commission land continues to grow (you can sign it here).
- Action Against Foxhunting in Hampshire & Wiltshire are gathering support for their campaign against the New Forest Hounds using the Forestry Commission’s land, and you can support them by emailing [email protected].
- Finally, a petition created by the League Against Cruel Sports calls for, amongst other things, an end to landowners allowing access to hunts – this includes the Forestry Commission, and the petition has been signed by over 124,000 people (you can sign it here).
© Jack Riggall
17th August 2019
On Peterloo & Bloodsports…
Rural resident desperately trying to keep foxhunters and hounds off a smallholding in Dorset. © Hounds Off
“Look to the rock whence thou wast hewn.” Isaiah, Old Testament prophet.
A peronal reflection by Mick Spreader
I hope that you didn’t let Friday 16th August 2019 pass without marking it as the 200th anniversary of the Peterloo massacre. On that day 60,000 working people and their families gathered on St Peter’s Field in Manchester to protest peacefully at a political system that concentrated power in the hands of the few, the wealthy and priviledged; they were calling for reform.
For decades the enclosing of common land upon which rural village way of life depended had been proceeding, but in the early half of the eighteenth century this accelerated resulting in rural clearances to the towns and cities. In other words, by act of a parliament of the privileged, the common land belonging to the various manors up and down the country, upon which the rural inhabitants were able to support themselves, was enclosed and added to the estates of the wealthy. Rural people could continue to live, almost certainly in dire circumstances, in the countryside as the paid labourers of wealthy landowners or move to the towns and cities to labour in the factories and mills. Either prospect was bleak, but for the privileged, who had added the enclosed commons to their estates, life was great.
“All classes above the poor adopted a more extravagant and ostentatious style and scale of living.”
About this period there was a general undercurrent of discontent in the country generated by a feeling of utter helplessness that the system could not be changed by parliamentary means. The system was rotten. Serious trouble broke out in the Royal Navy at the end of the previous century. In the countryside the Swing rioters were burning hayricks and smashing up threshing machines and in the urban areas protest gatherings such as met at St Peters Field were indicators of the demands for change.
For us it is interesting to note that “Foxhunting dates from this century,” that is the beginning of the 1800’s.
Prior to this, the aristocrat hunted the stag and the squire the hare, both quarry, almost certainly for human consumption. But killing wildlife for fun, as entertainment, emerged in this period amongst those who had the leisure time and the newly-enclosed estates to allow it.
But, I am digressing. Peterloo.
In this period the wealthy landowning class ( I was trying to avoid that word) were scared ****less of a French-style revolution in this island and were resolved to hold on to the extravagant lifestyle that they had appropriated to themselves by a crooked electoral system. Cavalry, even cannon, were brought to St Peters Field. As the speeches began at the meeting, the local magistrates ordered the cavalry to charge into the peaceful crowds, trampling, bayonetting and sabre-slashing. When it was over, at least 14 were dead, 15 if you include the unborn infant of its slain mother and 600 needed hospital attention.
There is good reason for us to look to the Peterloo martyrs as our spiritual forebears. We want change. We want a privileged class* to cease from hunting and killing wildlife, to cease from illegally pursuing the hare and the fox, the stag, the otter and the mink. We want that particular, privileged strata of our society who hunt to hounds to abide by the Hunting Act. But, because they are resolved to hang on to what they believe is their right, although the law of the land says “nay” and the overwhelming proportion of our society say “nay,” we, in our various ways, will put ourselves into the vulnerable position of confronting them as they go about their murderous ways.
On the 200th anniversary of Peterloo we salute those ordinary folk who suffered in the cause of suffrage.
“Quotes in italics” from The Village Labourer 1760-1832 by Hammond and Hammond unless otherwise stated.
© Mick Spreader
*Editors note: …and their minions.
Thou Shalt Not Pass. Viscount Astor, future father-in-law of Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron, shows great glee as he weaponises his horse against anti hunt protesters in the late 1980’s outside South Leigh church near Oxford. © Hounds Off
25th February 2019
Lactating Fox Hunted In Somerset Churchyard 23.02.19
Blackmore & Sparkford Vale Hunt hounds hot on the trail of a nursing vixen in St Peter & St Paul's Churchyard, Charlton Horethorne, Somerset on 23.02.19 Photo: Kevin Hill/Hounds Off/Somerset Wildlife Crime
HOUNDS OFF PRESS RELEASE MON 25 FEBRUARY 2019
- Hunters in Somerset were forced to call their hounds off a female fox because anti hunt monitors recorded the whole incident on film.
- At about 2pm on Saturday 23 February 2019 the Blackmore & Sparkford Vale Hunt chased the vixen through private gardens and the churchyard of St Peter & St Paul’s in Charlton Horethorne, just a stones throw from the hunt kennels. But Somerset Wildlife Crime and Hounds Off Monitors, equipped with video cameras, were at the scene and recorded it.
- Wildlife rescue expert Penny Little (tel: 07702 565598) reviewed their footage. She said, “I am confident this hunted fox is a vixen that has recently given birth to cubs as her teats are visible and show clear evidence of lactation.”
- WATCH SOMERSET WILDLIFE CRIME / HOUNDS OFF FILM HERE
- Footage shows a fox being hunted through gravestones and into bushes where by some miracle it gives chasing dogs the slip. Campaigners film also documents the moment when the nursing vixen tries to steal away unseen and is “hollered” by a member of the hunt (a loud, high-pitched yell to inform the Huntsman and his hounds that the fox has been spotted).
- Bobbie Armstrong (tel: 07572 495309) from Somerset Wildlife Crime said, “When the fox crossed in front of us we told a red-coated hunter to call hounds off. At this point they were right on her and it looked grim but the red-coat knew we had it all on film. He had little choice but to call hounds back and let the fox get away. It was all a bit tense for a while but we were pleased to be in the right place at the right time.”
- Foxhunting has been illegal in England and Wales since 2005 but hunts continue, claiming to chase a trail which they lay in advance. The “accidental” hunting and killing of foxes during so-called ‘trail hunts’ is commonplace and the law remains powerless to prevent this.
- Hunt Monitor Kevin Hill (tel: 07971 633182) said, “It seems pretty obvious that the Blackmore & Sparkford Vale Hunt were cheerfully and deliberately chasing foxes on Saturday and if we had not been there then they’d have got away with it. Think about it for a second. Who in their right mind would lay a trail through private gardens and a churchyard?”
- Bobbie Armstrong said she had spoken to the Reverend Sarah Godfrey, the Vicar at Charlton Horethorne. According to Ms Armstrong, “She wasn’t aware of the events of yesterday and was keen to see our evidence. The Vicar was grateful to be informed.”
- Hounds Off specialises in giving help, support and advice to farmers, landowners and rural residents affected by hunt trespass. Joe Hashman, Founder, said, “We can help the Reverend Godfrey if she wants to make the churchyard into a hunt-free wildlife sanctuary. All she needs to do is visit the Action & Advice pages of our website or ask us. The same goes for anyone else, anywhere in the country.”
- Somerset Wildlife Crime and Hounds Off Monitors did not see anyone laying trails, or even pretending to lay trails, at any time throughout the day.
Blackmore & Sparkford Vale Hunt hounds invade St Peter & St Paul’s Churchyard in Charlton Horethorne on 23.02.19 in persuit of a live fox. Photo: Kevin Hill/Hounds Off/Somerset Wildlife Crime
Fox is chased with dogs across St Peter & St Paul’s Churchyard in Charlton Horethorne, Somerset, 23.02.19 by the Blackmore & Sparkford Vale Hunt. Photo: Kevin Hill/Hounds Off/Somerset Wildlife Crime
A significant undercarriage is a telltale sign that this hunted vixen was nursing young cubs underground nearby. Photo: Kevin Hill/Hounds Off/Somerset Wildlife Crime
NOTES
In recent weeks the Blackmore & Sparkford Vale Hunt;
- was supposedly ‘trailhunting’ beside and across the busy A352 until after dark on February 19 2019.
- killed a fox ‘accidentally’ on February 9 2019.
- carried on hunting with horses and hounds two days after equine flu was confirmed at a local riding stables.
IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SUPPORT OUR WORK PLEASE BUY US A KO-FI;
- Somerset Wildlife Crime
- Hounds Off
10th February 2019
Hunters Disregard Horse Welfare
About 70 riders followed the Blackmore & Sparkford Vale Hunt from their meet at Marsh Court in Dorset on 09.02.19, contrary to biosecurity advice from The Hunting Office with equine flu at large. Photo © Hounds Off
BREAKING: PRESITIGIOUS SOMERSET STABLES CONFIRMS EQUINE FLU BUT LOCAL HUNT CARRIES ON REGARDLESS
Horse racing was suspended last week after an outbreak of equine flu at a Cheshire stables. Equine flu is a highly contagious and unpleasant viral infection which affects the respiratory system in horses. Explaining its decisive action, the British Horseracing Authority said (7 Feb), “The health and welfare of our horses must be a priority.”
It is unfortunate that some of the hunting world has chosen to carry on regardless.
Despite Horse & Hound reporting (8 Feb) advice from The Hunting Office*, “Where there are training yards in the area it may be sensible not to hunt this weekend,” it was actually business as usual for many mounted foxhound packs across the British Isles (9 Feb).
One such hunt was the Somerset-based Blackmore & Sparkford Vale, where about seventy riders turned out on horseback to gallop behind dogs chasing the scent of foxes. Blackmore & Sparkford Vale Hunt country is known for having some big stables, including Paul Nicholls Racing at Ditcheat, Colin Tizzard Venn Farm Racing Ltd at Milborne Port and Millfield School at Street where equine flu was confirmed on 8 Feb.
Hounds Off Founder Joe Hashman said, “If the Blackmore & Sparkford Vale Hunt genuinely cared about the health and wellbeing of horses they’d have suspended all mounted hunting immediately. The fact that they have chosen to carry on hunting demonstrates how prepared they are to put horses at risk rather than lose a days play.”
© Joe Hashman; Founder, Hounds Off
* The Hunting Office is the administrative hub for the Council of Hunting Associations. The Hunting Office exists to help and advise Masters and its member Hunts. It represents and supports packs of hounds from fourteen hunting associations in England, Scotland and Wales, providing advice on all matters regarding hunting activities, hunt management and hound health & welfare.
1st February 2019
How To Report Hunt Incidents To The National Trust
Report illegal, thuggish, dangerous and disrespectful hunt behaviour to the National Trust in a consistent way that makes it harder for them to ignore:
-
Report illegal, thuggish, dangerous or disrespectful actions or behaviour regardless of whether it happens on National Trust land because they should take this in to account when deciding to issue a licence, or not.
-
Report hunts licenced by the National Trust.
-
Report unlicensed hunts that are trespassing on National Trust land.
General Resources
- If you need to find out which hunts are currently licensed by the National Trust, all dates & maps can be seen on our Facebook page here.
- The individual ‘photo albums’ for each hunt licence also contain the contact details for the local National Trust staff who manage the area being hunted.
- If you need to confirm if the National Trust own a particular bit of land, their property boundaries can all be seen here (NOTE: please use the ‘explore’ function to open a map).
What To Report
- Brief/concise accounts of what happened, where & when.
- Presence of terriermen.
- Blocked or damaged badger setts (if any have been discovered).
- Aggression, intimidation, abuse or violent behaviour from hunt staff or supporters.
- Any police incident numbers or crime reference numbers you have been given (always make sure to ask for these when reporting illegal hunting to the police).
- If you are able to film what’s happening please do because footage can help. If you weren’t able film or photograph then please still provide a written account of what you saw to the National Trust and don’t let them dismiss you for not having footage.
Who To Report It To
- Contact details for the most relevant point of contact within the National Trust for each hunt licence can be found here.
- In addition to this, please also CC in Nick Droy and his ‘trail hunting’ management team at [email protected] as well as ourselves at [email protected]
Finally….
- National Dis-Trust volunteers will always be on hand if you are unsure about how to go ahead with any of the above (especially hunt trespass) as relevant National Trust contact details may not be readily available.
- Contact us on Facebook, Twitter or via [email protected]
Jack Riggall, National Dis-Trust.
Please share.
21st December 2018
Illegal Hunting - Eye Witness Accounts
Surrey Hunt Monitors call illegal hunting out.
On Wednesday I observed the Portman Hunt blatantly chasing foxes in Dorset.
At about 11.30am I saw two quad bikes and some riders appear over the brow of a low hill, then the Huntsman with his pack of hounds at heel. He took them to foxy-looking bit of rough ground and let them go off and sniff around. His voice calls encouraged them and he rolled his tongue in a way which has been practiced by generations of foxhunters and is designed to rouse their quarry.
After a while one hound started to bark. “Speaking,” hunters call it. Then another and another and within seconds all the twenty-odd hounds were on, actively hunting and speaking in unison, running in and out of thick hedges and undergrowth, back and fore between a woodyard and scrubland in pursuit of a fox who was, unseen, twisting and turning in front and trying to shake them off.
The Huntsman was cunningly wearing a black coat so as to blend in with other riders. Once things got going he stood back to make it look like he wasn’t in full control and could claim to a policeman or a Judge that any illegal foxhunting was accidental. Additionally, there were people scattered around in all directions on foot and no doubt some of them would claim they were “laying a trail”.
I knew they were illegally hunting but hadn’t seen the fox so didn’t report the crime.
Hounds hunted locally for well over half and hour. There was a quiet interlude before the noise started again. Can’t be certain what happened there but likely the fox had found a refuge and before the hunt could continue he had to be flushed out with smaller, specialist dogs. That’s why blokes follow on quad bikes equipped with terriers and spades. They deny it, of course they do, but actually it’s a fact.
Then I could see and hear, from my vantage, that the hunt had gone away. Before they disappeared from view they turned left-handed and after that I was unable to keep track.
I was with friends standing on guard on a piece of land where hunting is forbidden. At 12.50pm I saw a small dot moving, left to right, across a field in the distance and lifted my binoculars to have a closer look. It was a fox. I watched him for a few seconds until he ran out of view.
Sure enough, less than a minute later the whole pack poured through a hedge into that same field and followed precisely the same line as I had just seen the fox take. They disappeared from view in exactly the same place too. And following the hounds were the riders. Doubtless they were having a fine old time. “Just like the good old days,” you could almost hear them think.
That’s when I called the police on 101 and reported the illegal hunting as a wildlife crime. I explained exactly what I’d seen. I couldn’t stop the hunt and even if I had captured the scene on film (which I didn’t) the evidence wouldn’t have stood up to dishonest cross examination in a court of law. But at least it’s recorded and has become a statistic (Crime Log Number I19-186), which is important.
Modern day policing is statistics-led. This means that resources are allocated where, statistically, there is deemed to be most need.
My Sister-in-Law wrote the following short letter to the local paper after she witnessed and reported illegal foxhunting recently too (Crime Log Number 8-224), which we publish here because they didn’t.
“Standing in a back garden last Saturday (8 December) I was blessed with the scene of a fox running across the field beyond, its body full stretch as it sped over the grass underfoot. My awe was quickly broken as only a few seconds later a pack of hounds emerged hot on the fox’s tail. To my shock I was witnessing the local hunt in full motion.
“Fox hunting has been illegal for many years so to see the hunt chasing a fox was a shock and deeply saddening. There was nothing to suggest the hunt was going to call the hounds off, which is what I’ve since been told is supposed to happen.
“I am not naive in thinking that what I saw was anything other than what was intended … the chase … the kill and whatever it is that the people who take part in this type of sport get from doing this.
“I didn’t choose to see or be part of what happened just a few metres away from me that day, but it left me feeling distressed and angry.
“Why is it okay to flout the law in this cruel way?”
C Fawcett, Shaftesbury
© Joe Hashman
15th December 2018
Hunting Myths (Complete) by Zoologist Jordi Casamitjana
Zoologist Jordi Casamitjana (second left) with (l to r) Joe Hashman (Hounds Off), Chris Williamson (MP), Penny Little (Protect Our Wild Animals) & Philip Mansbridge (IFAW) at the Trail Of Lies launch in 2015, a report written by Casamitjana which deconstructed & exposed the false alibi of so-called 'trail-hunting'.
Make no mistake, the bloodsports lobby are currently pitching hunting with hounds as a humane and cost-effective form of “wildlife management” with smarmy smiles and cleverly constructed, pseudo-scientific arguments. And they still believe that they can win.
On October 11th 2018 the Horse & Hound Magazine published and interview with ex-League Against Cruel Sports Executive Director turned pro-hunt advocate James Barrington, entitled “Hunting’s Most Valuable Asset?” Barrington is part of the Countryside Alliance and Veterinary Association for Wildlife Management, both organisations which campaign for repeal of the Hunting Act (2004) and a return to the days when chasing and killing foxes, hare, mink and deer with packs of hounds was legal.
Dismissing or ignoring the relentless campaign of lies and misinformation would be foolish. That’s why Hounds Off invited zoologist Jordi Casamitjana to respond to the claims made by Mr Barrington and were pleased to publish these in a series of blog posts, the links for which are below. Do feel free to share any or all of them as appropriate. Read More >>
14th December 2018
Hunting Myths Pt 7: Snakeoil Salesman’s Last Stand
Who in their right mind could approve of the so-called "sport" of hare coursing, where hares are forced to run for their lives in front of greyhounds (or similar fast running dogs) while spectators gawp, bookies profit and officials judge and award points for every twist, turn, trip and kill? Photo credit: Ed Maynard.
Zoologist Jordi Casamitjana writes exclusively for Hounds Off
Mr Barrington and the Countryside Alliance keep saying it’s a myth that the majority of the population is against hunting (Horse & Hound, 11.10.18). They often refer to particular attendance of anti-hunting or pro-wildlife events as evidence. The truth is that in the last two decades there has not been any single poll that has not shown a majority of a UK population being against hunting. This must be quite hard to swallow for Mr Barrington because, despite all his efforts, the percentages of people against hunting keep rising. It’s well over the 80% mark now.
Of course he will now claim that polls undertaken by reputable polling companies using big random samples don’t show the reality of public opinion, suggesting instead we should just count how many people have attended a particular hunting protest or Parliamentary reception, then conclude those are the only people opposing hunting. And, of course, if he continues to ignore science it would not be surprising if he said that if no “antis” have attended a packed hunting ball or a pro-hunting countryside event, this must mean the anti-hunting sentiment has vanished and people in the UK now wants hunting back (which is kind of what he implies in the Horse & Hound article).
Mr Barrington also must be very frustrated when again and again attempts to repeal or weaken the Hunting Act 2004 have failed because a dwindling number of pro-hunt MPs, even during Conservative Governments.
I am sure he will not give up, though, as he has a job to do, so he will continue trying to deceive on-the-fence MPs (or MPs that are secretly pro-hunt) into believing that he can offer a supposedly “middle way” between the two sides of the hunting debate (as he did during the debate for the passing of the Hunting Act 2004).
Some MPs may fall into this as he will do that by disguising the repeal of the hunting ban with a new “Wild Mammals Protection Bill”, which will sound good, as will talk about protection of mammals and banning some horrible practices … but in the end it will introduce a licensing system which will allow only a “select” group of “experts” to undertake wild mammal “lethal” control … and you know who he will be referring to, don’t you? Yes, registered hunts, of course.
Fortunately, it would not take that much for those deceived politicians to realise the trap they were about to fall into. But it is important we keep vigilant and help them to avoid falling and persuade them instead to support any initiative to strengthen the Hunting Act 2004 and the Protection of Wild Mammals (Scotland) Act 2002, to eliminate all the loopholes (such as the “flushing to guns” or the “observation and research” exemptions) and false alibis (such as “trail hunting”) which hunts constantly use to circumvent the law.
It’s not surprising that the rejection of hunting by the UK population, both rural and urban, in any constituency in the UK, is denied by Mr Barrington and colleagues. This is classic “denial”, which I am sure he has to do as part of his job … but he must know by now that there is no way back, for hunting, and for him.
If Mr Barrington is indeed “hunting‘s most valuable asset” we just need to be sure he doesn’t get away with false claims and sneaky political manoeuvres and keep him “at bay” every time he surfaces. Hunting with dogs is an obsolete cruel activity and eventually will be completely abolished, no matter which “assets” are used to derail this unstoppable social progress.
© Jordi Casamitjana
Zoologist
PREVIOUSLY
Hunting Myths Pt 1: The Snakeoil Salesman
Hunting Myths Pt 2: They Only Go For The Sick Old & Weak
Hunting Myths Pt 3: Hunting Is Efficient & Humane
Hunting Myths Pt 4: Hunting Is Natural
Hunting Myths Pt 5: Hunting Conserves The Countryside
Hunting Myths Pt 6: Hunting Is Wildlife Management
13th December 2018
Hunting Myths Pt 6: Hunting Is Wildlife Management
Pest Control, wildlife management or simply a cruel sport which made some money & satisfied the bestial urges of a sadistic minority? Here, now defunct New Forest Buckhounds Huntsman John Stride fumbles in his pocket for a gun whilst straddling an exhausted fallow buck run to collapse in a stream. Stills from a film taken in 1995 by Wildlife Action.
Zoologist Jordi Casamitjana writes exclusively for Hounds Off
Perhaps the claim that wild animals need to be lethally managed by people is the most crucial false argument Mr Barrington uses in his rhetoric (Horse & Hound, 11.10.18). He always tries to get others to accept this claim before he then moves with the claim that ‘if they need to be killed, better do it with dogs’. But the truth is that in most cases, wildlife doesn’t need to be managed. In most cases, natural ecosystems (and the wildlife in them) need to be preserved by preventing humans’ interference and letting Nature to find its own balance. And in the cases where Nature needs a helping hand because we humans have messed the ecosystem too much, there are plenty of feasible wildlife management methods that are not lethal, and therefore are not based on killing wildlife (such as fencing, shepherding, translocations, management of available food, deterrents, etc.).
Unfortunately this dangerous idea that killing is necessary to succeed is very much entrenched in the minds of many landowners, from farmers killing wildlife around their land to protect their ‘products’, to shooting estates eliminating predators of the animals they want to sell as live targets for the guns, to conservation organisations obsessed with the preservation of a particular species and wanting to kill other animals that compete with them.
As such, non-lethal methods of wildlife management are often ignored and unnecessary killing is chosen when it should have been avoided. This accounts for the examples Mr Barrington uses in the article, which he uses as either examples of compulsion (‘it needs to be done’) or hypocrisy ( ‘we have to do it but we want to keep it secret’), as if somehow validates such practices. These examples of Mr Barrington’s lethal ideas are so dangerous that even some organisations which should be protecting animals are unfortunately (and erroneously) seduced by them, causing much unnecessary suffering and death.
In the case of foxes it is particularly true that they don’t need lethal control, as a lot of research has already proven that the fox population is not growing out of control, and their ‘negative’ effect on farming has been greatly exaggerated. Research has already shown how little foxes contribute to lamb predation and that it is likely that when a shepherd finds evidence of a fox eating a lamb this may be because the lamb died from other causes. The fox is just being a scavenger.
And foxes who take advantage of poor human husbandry by getting into henhouses do not kill more than they can eat at one sitting for the sheer fun of it. ‘Surplus killing’, as it is known, is a survival technique which has evolved in foxes to guard against future food shortages.
Fox populations self-regulate because they are composed by territorial animals, so the populations are kept more or less stable if the space and food availability does not change. And if there is a problem with a particular fox, killing it may make it worse. If farmers remove an older fox with any lethal wildlife management method because they consider this fox ‘vermin’ another young fox will replace it very soon after as the territory become vacant and no longer defended by the older fox. This new fox is most likely to be more ‘problematic’ to farming as it is likely to be more inexperienced and not know the territory well, venturing more into places it is not welcomed (the areas where livestock are kept), and thus making the ‘problem’ even worse.
In Mr Barrington‘s article it is claimed that hunting provides a huge level of controlled public access to private land, but everyone who has attempted to monitor hunting knows how false this is. It is precisely the fact hunts these days use much private land which the public are not allowed to enter which allows them to hunt illegally with impunity, as it is difficult to obtain evidence without such access. Hunt supporters don’t hesitate to prevent public access to rights of way and common land because they fear that anyone who does not belong to their fraternity may end up reporting them to the authorities when they witness what they actually do.
From blocking roads with their vehicles to physically assaulting bystanders, the hunting fraternity is well known for their intimidation and violent tactics towards the general public, so this claim is quite ludicrous.
© Jordi Casamitjana
Zoologist
PREVIOUSLY
Hunting Myths Pt 1: The Snakeoil Salesman
Hunting Myths Pt 2: They Only Go For The Sick Old & Weak
Hunting Myths Pt 3: Hunting Is Efficient & Humane
Hunting Myths Pt 4: Hunting Is Natural
Hunting Myths Pt 5: Hunting Conserves The Countryside
11th December 2018
Hunting Myths Pt 5: Hunting Conserves The Countryside
A hunt-free wildlife sanctuary in Dorset where a 'light touch' and minimal disturbance is enabling plants and animals to thrive.
OPINION: Zoologist Jordi Casamitjana writes exclusively for Hounds Off
It is claimed that hunts help to create a biodiverse ecosystem, but there has never been any evidence to support this claim. How can the use of a pack of hounds chasing wild animals to death followed by a group of riders trampling all over the countryside help biodiversity? Every time hunts remove the hunted animals from the ecosystem they are reducing its biodiversity. Every time they disrupt badger sets or block holes to prevent foxes to hide, they affect the survival rates of wildlife using these holes, reducing biodiversity. Every time they trespass with lots of hounds, horses and vehicles into Nature Reserves or Natural Parks they disturb wildlife which may decrease biodiversity.
Not to forget that hunting in any of its forms has historically contributed to the extinction of many of the animals that used to exist in the UK, such as Wild boar or the Eurasian bison. Every time otter hunters used to hunt otters they put this species closer to extinction, until the otters become legally protected (leading to the creation of Mink Hunts, which continue hunting illegally, both mink and otters). And hunts still hound hares today (even if is also illegal), the populations of which are considered threatened in the British Islands.
Man-made extinctions of local populations are considered the worst biodiversity “sins”, and the hunting/shooting fraternity, together with the animal agriculture industry, undoubtedly are the worst culprits.
The idea that hunting is responsible for farmers and landowners keeping some of their land as wild and natural as possible to allow the “quarry” to thrive before they are killed, falls completely on its face when it is used at the same time with the claim hunts are about lethal control of wildlife (now conveniently labelled “vermin”). And this claim is made even more ridiculous in the article by Mr. Barrington saying that the worse British ecological disasters had been the release of North American mink from fur farms, the outbreak of BT in Baronsdown and the overpopulation of badgers, somehow trying to vilify the animal protection movement implying they are responsible for this.
In actual fact it is very well-known that the American mink was already established in the wild in the UK many years before any animal rights activist released any from the fur farms, because the same fur farmers, possibly pro-hunt, had released them or let them escape. It is a very well-known fact that the Bovine TB outbreak in the deer population of Barnosdown (and any piece of land with deer in the West Country, by the way) was caused by the cattle farmers, most likely hunt supporters, which caused the disease in the first place (remember this is “bovine” TB, not “Deer” TB) and spread it all around the country. It is a very well-known fact that there is no evidence to support that there is an over-population of badgers in the UK and only those who support the current badger cull, many of them pro-hunt farmers and shooting states, have developed this deception, together with the falsehood that badgers are responsible of the BTb epidemic in cattle (which, again, was clearly caused by the destructive cattle industry, the undeniable number one cause of Global Warming, as report after report keeps confirming).
© Jordi Casamitjana
Zoologist
PREVIOUSLY
Hunting Myths Pt 1: The Snakeoil Salesman
Hunting Myths Pt 2: They Only Go For The Sick Old & Weak
Hunting Myths Pt 3: Hunting Is Efficient & Humane
Hunting Myths Pt 4: Hunting Is Natural
