Clodagh
Well-Known Member
That line alone puts people off commenting, well it did me! Passive aggressive anyone?
.But the man’s an arse, and is already suspended for the actions in that video and other findings.
Hunting is in a spot of bother
- Thread starter Tiddlypom
- Start date
.But the man’s an arse, and is already suspended for the actions in that video and other findings.
Tiddlypom
Carries on creakily
Passive aggressive is downplaying what I feel when I see that video 
.
Sadly, it is always the same. Isolated occurrence, etc etc.
ETA Oh, and it's nothing to do with the hunt which employed him as their huntsman, then. That's reassuring to know
.
.Sadly, it is always the same. Isolated occurrence, etc etc.
ETA Oh, and it's nothing to do with the hunt which employed him as their huntsman, then. That's reassuring to know
.
Last edited:
Clodagh
Well-Known Member
Well it wasn’t directly. Although he did bring the sport into disrepute.
Tiddlypom
Carries on creakily
The Old Berks don't seem to be in a hurry to update their website. This is still there to be found. He's been with them for several seasons as whipper in and then as huntsman.
www.oldberkshunt.co.uk
OBH The Masters
www.oldberkshunt.co.uk
flat3
Well-Known Member
I saw this and it made me think of this thread.
www.timeforchangecoalition.co.uk
A brief Google suggests this is new...
Time For Change Coalition | End Hunting
As a coalition of leading animal welfare charities, we believe it's Time For Change. Use your voice today to help end hunting for good.
www.timeforchangecoalition.co.uk
A brief Google suggests this is new...
Tiddlypom
Carries on creakily
Two guilty of wildlife offences after fox attack https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-66113993
Two of the charming individuals in the notorious Avon Vale case have pleaded guilty and been sentenced. Ah bless, the defence barrister stated that the "high profile" of the case had "destroyed the lives of the two defendants" and both had since lost their jobs.
Poor little dears. They have escaped with what seems like very light sentencing for such abhorrent crimes.
Fookes was sentenced to 200 hours of community service and fined £1,200. Radbourne, of The Common, Bromham, who faced one charge of hunting a wild mammal with dogs, received a £580 fine.
ETA The BBC Farming Today program reported on the verdicts this morning. The BBC has definitely upped its game recently at reporting on illegal hunting and illegal activities by hunts.
Two of the charming individuals in the notorious Avon Vale case have pleaded guilty and been sentenced. Ah bless, the defence barrister stated that the "high profile" of the case had "destroyed the lives of the two defendants" and both had since lost their jobs.
Poor little dears. They have escaped with what seems like very light sentencing for such abhorrent crimes.
Fookes was sentenced to 200 hours of community service and fined £1,200. Radbourne, of The Common, Bromham, who faced one charge of hunting a wild mammal with dogs, received a £580 fine.
ETA The BBC Farming Today program reported on the verdicts this morning. The BBC has definitely upped its game recently at reporting on illegal hunting and illegal activities by hunts.
Last edited:
Annagain
Well-Known Member
Every time a new response appears on this thread I think "what have they done now". I'm somewhat relieved it's an update on a previous offence rather than more wrongdoing. Sadly I know more will come soon.
CrunchieBoi
Well-Known Member
It'd be nice if the charging of everyone else present at the time would follow.
Lowlifes to a man/woman.
Tiddlypom
Carries on creakily
Remember The Times earlier on this year covering the two individuals being covertly filmed blocking a badger sett, and then legging it off on a quad bike when challenged, despite at least one them of being recognised? Link here, but it's behind a paywall.
www.thetimes.co.uk
The then huntsman of the Wynnstay yesterday pleaded guilty in court to interfering with the entrance to a badger sett. It really was a case of 'Gotcha'. Under the Protection of Badgers Act 1992 it is an offence to interfere with a badger sett, including obstructing access.
The 38-year-old was handed a £500 fine for the offence and ordered to pay costs of £85 to the Crown Prosecution Service and a £200 surcharge fee.
Unless things have changed from last season, a conviction for wild life crimes or even for actual illegal foxhunting is no bar to being employed by a registered BHSA 'trail' hunt. This laxness would have been tightened up long ago if the governing body had any real desire for reform, or to drum out the naughty boys.
Hunt run by friend of King Charles investigated by police
A hunt run by a friend of the King is being investigated by police after two of its members were allegedly filmed filling in badger setts to stop foxes escapi
www.thetimes.co.uk
The then huntsman of the Wynnstay yesterday pleaded guilty in court to interfering with the entrance to a badger sett. It really was a case of 'Gotcha'. Under the Protection of Badgers Act 1992 it is an offence to interfere with a badger sett, including obstructing access.
The 38-year-old was handed a £500 fine for the offence and ordered to pay costs of £85 to the Crown Prosecution Service and a £200 surcharge fee.
Unless things have changed from last season, a conviction for wild life crimes or even for actual illegal foxhunting is no bar to being employed by a registered BHSA 'trail' hunt. This laxness would have been tightened up long ago if the governing body had any real desire for reform, or to drum out the naughty boys.
Last edited:
flat3
Well-Known Member
I'm surprised this hasn't been commented on!I saw this and it made me think of this thread.
Time For Change Coalition | End Hunting
As a coalition of leading animal welfare charities, we believe it's Time For Change. Use your voice today to help end hunting for good.
A brief Google suggests this is new...
"Together we are asking for the law to be strengthened to close the loopholes that exist within the legislation. Additionally, we want to see trail hunting outlawed, and hounds trained instead to take part in drag hunting or clean boot hunting, neither of which involve following an animal-based scent. "
Millionwords
Well-Known Member
Seems decidedly iffy given the effort of the other members of the force must have taken to get it to court in the first place;
Senior officer from Warwickshire Police has intervened on behalf of the hunt and dropped the CPN, replacing it with a watered-down, non-legally binding ‘protocol’ which the Warwickshire Hunt are under no legal obligation to follow.
"On Wednesday December 14th 2022, Warwickshire Police issued a Community Protection Notice (CPN) to the Warwickshire Hunt Limited after repeated anti-social use of public roads in Warwickshire.
The hunt immediately put in an appeal meaning the CPN was unenforceable until the appeal had been heard. This was due to have been heard on the 15th and 17th August 2023 at Birmingham Magistrates Court.
It looked likely that the hunt would lose their appeal, with the CPN conditions making it almost impossible for an illegal hunt to operate as normal, whilst also setting a precedent for other police forces around the country to do the same.
However, days before it was due in court, a senior officer from Warwickshire Police has intervened on behalf of the hunt and dropped the CPN, replacing it with a watered-down, non-legally binding ‘protocol’ which the Warwickshire Hunt are under no legal obligation to follow.
The CPN imposed conditions under the scope of the Anti-Social Behaviour Crime and Policing Act 2014. The conditions would have required the Warwickshire Hunt to give the police advance notice of all hunt meets, and details of the times and locations of road crossing points. There were also requirements for the hunt to notify all riders about their responsibilities around crossing roads at designated points. If the conditions had been breached, it would have led to criminal action.
Even more worrying than the CPN being dropped is the contents of the new agreement:
It is astonishing that police officers must have spent a lot of time and resources putting this case together and getting it to court only for a senior officer to undermine them to let an organised criminal gang off the hook and put in place something more favourable to them.
They have gone from imposing legally agreed conditions under the CPN to a ‘protocol’ which is nothing more than an informal gentleman’s agreement which the Warwickshire Hunt are under no legal obligation to follow. Worse, they’ll be forewarned about future police activity allowing the hunt to cover their backs."
Senior officer from Warwickshire Police has intervened on behalf of the hunt and dropped the CPN, replacing it with a watered-down, non-legally binding ‘protocol’ which the Warwickshire Hunt are under no legal obligation to follow.
"On Wednesday December 14th 2022, Warwickshire Police issued a Community Protection Notice (CPN) to the Warwickshire Hunt Limited after repeated anti-social use of public roads in Warwickshire.
The hunt immediately put in an appeal meaning the CPN was unenforceable until the appeal had been heard. This was due to have been heard on the 15th and 17th August 2023 at Birmingham Magistrates Court.
It looked likely that the hunt would lose their appeal, with the CPN conditions making it almost impossible for an illegal hunt to operate as normal, whilst also setting a precedent for other police forces around the country to do the same.
However, days before it was due in court, a senior officer from Warwickshire Police has intervened on behalf of the hunt and dropped the CPN, replacing it with a watered-down, non-legally binding ‘protocol’ which the Warwickshire Hunt are under no legal obligation to follow.
The CPN imposed conditions under the scope of the Anti-Social Behaviour Crime and Policing Act 2014. The conditions would have required the Warwickshire Hunt to give the police advance notice of all hunt meets, and details of the times and locations of road crossing points. There were also requirements for the hunt to notify all riders about their responsibilities around crossing roads at designated points. If the conditions had been breached, it would have led to criminal action.
Even more worrying than the CPN being dropped is the contents of the new agreement:
- Warwickshire Police have agreed to forewarn the Warwickshire Hunt and give them a heads-up an hour before if they intend to come out and police the hunt.
- The police have agreed to inform the hunt if any complaints have been made against them. This is very worrying from the point of view of protecting witnesses and allowing the hunt to get their story straight.
- The hunt has demanded monthly meetings with a Chief Inspector, highlighting their arrogance and self-entitlement.
- The police have agreed that the hunt can have an on-demand liaison officer for any given day.
- The Police have agreed to joint training regarding road safety with the hunt. Why should a limited company that was due up in court for road traffic issues be provided with training out of public money?
- From the hunts side, they must inform the police with a calendar of all their meets.
- They must inform all members of the hunt of their responsibilities regarding dogs on the highway.
- The police reserve the right to impose further CPNs in the future. Given how senior officers put an end to this CPN this now seems unlikely.
It is astonishing that police officers must have spent a lot of time and resources putting this case together and getting it to court only for a senior officer to undermine them to let an organised criminal gang off the hook and put in place something more favourable to them.
They have gone from imposing legally agreed conditions under the CPN to a ‘protocol’ which is nothing more than an informal gentleman’s agreement which the Warwickshire Hunt are under no legal obligation to follow. Worse, they’ll be forewarned about future police activity allowing the hunt to cover their backs."
Last edited:
ycbm
Einstein would be proud of my Insanity...
Clodagh
Well-Known Member
The people who drew it up in the first place obviously weren’t members of the right Lodge. I wonder if the Essex one will be dropped too?
I think it was Warwickshire police who showed how much crime had been reduced by putting it in place.
Trespass, road blocking etc, not just wildlife crime.
I think it was Warwickshire police who showed how much crime had been reduced by putting it in place.
Trespass, road blocking etc, not just wildlife crime.
GSD Woman
Well-Known Member
Why for sake of all that is right and honorable can't these d@mn hunts just obey the law? Do they have any clue that because of them trail hunting and even possibly clean boot hunting will be outlawed?
Sandstone1
Well-Known Member
I would like to say I am surprised but sadly the hunt appears to have friends in high places.
Millionwords
Well-Known Member
Bent* friends in high places.
Sandstone1
Well-Known Member
Exactly
gunnergundog
Well-Known Member
Published in May this year.
Sandstone1
Well-Known Member
Surely if foxes are such pests to lambs and poultry as we are told by the hunt then this is a good thing.
Millionwords
Well-Known Member
So then there was no need to hunt them then or now as the intention was to reduce the population....because they're so "problematic".
It's likely cause they aren't being encouraged with artificial earth's, cubs in barns, pregnant vixens in sacks as much as they were to provide "sport".
Clodagh
Well-Known Member
I think it’s mainly the spread of shooting and also that there is now less goodwill towards foxes. When we had a farm, and hunted, we left the foxes be unless they took chickens from the garden in daylight. After the ban when we stopped hunting and started a shoot on our land we just shot them all.
ycbm
Einstein would be proud of my Insanity...
There is no shortage of foxes, they just realised that suburbia was easier living than the country.
.
.
Maesfen
Extremely Old Nag!
There's a shortage around here; very rare to see one now and we always had foxes.
blitznbobs
Well-Known Member
They ate all my chickens this summer … actually killed them all and ate 1
Clodagh
Well-Known Member
It’s what they do. I really hate it when they don’t take them though, it’s more upsetting cleaning them up.
I started this summer with 8 Millefleur Dutch bantams, some were elderly, I’m down to one. The oldest.
Caol Ila
Well-Known Member
Haha. We have all the foxes. It’s like a fox rave around here. I like seeing the wee guys.
Tiddlypom
Carries on creakily
The antis seem pretty certain that the Police and Crime Commisioner for Warwickshire is a member of the Countryside Alliance 
.
Whether he is or not, undue influence appears to have been exerted somewhere along the line not only for the CPN on the Warwickshire Hunt to be rescinded, but for the hunt now be given advance notice of a police presence at hunts.
Quite frankly, it stinks.
.Whether he is or not, undue influence appears to have been exerted somewhere along the line not only for the CPN on the Warwickshire Hunt to be rescinded, but for the hunt now be given advance notice of a police presence at hunts.
Quite frankly, it stinks.
Parrotperson
Well-Known Member
Since I moved to Northumberland two and a half years ago I've not seen one single fox. We have roe deer, badgers, hares, weasels (all in abundance) rabbits and all sorts of bird life but no foxes. City life is apparently much easier.
littleshetland
Well-Known Member
All my chickens are free range - Ive got about 12 hens, and I let them out in the morning and they roam around all day. Ive lost a few over the years where foxy has come along and picked off the odd individual hen, but Ive not experienced this mass slaughter that they're capable off. Is it because when the fox enters and enclosed space ie chicken run, the hens flap and panic sending the fox into a killing frenzy?
GSD Woman
Well-Known Member
Next spring I'll send you mine. ;-)