Hunting is in a spot of bother

[hollyandivy123]

 

[TGM]

See my local bloodhound pack releases the route map for the foot followers before the day of the hunt, so assume others have access to it if they want?

Do they publish the entire route? I can understand letting foot followers know where each individual hunt starts and ends, or even certain vantage parts where they can watch from the road, but knowing the whole route does take some of the fun and uncertainty out of it, plus runs the risk of pedestrian 'spectators' crossing the route that the quarry have taken and disrupting the scent. Which is why our local pack don't do it.

 

[Tiddlypom]

The National Trust have now joined Forestry England in pausing trail hunting on their land.

"...we have taken the decision to pause trail-hunting on National Trust land and will not be granting any new licences for the remainder of the season. We do not currently have a date when this will be reviewed."

 

[palo1]

Hunting is a dying 'sport' - tbh its place in the world is a matter of time before it disappears and it will probably happen from imploding. More and more hunts need to amalgamate in order to survive. When rich hunts like the Quorn and Cottesmore looked to merge (though they didn't) then you know its only a matter of time. TBH the stupidity of the MFH doing this is just astounding. I don't know who sits in the office and checks the content but they should be chased on a trail and then shot.....

I am ambivalent about hunting and come from a strong hunting background and my childhood was spent hunting but don't really see the point of it anymore. Life changes and however much we fight it we have become a more urbanised society.

In 2015 the BBC reported that the number of people registered with a hunt (trail, drag and blood hound) had increased from the point of the ban to a number around 45,000. Most hunts would accord that the number of people they have is not decreasing; though their country may be becoming more difficult to maintain for a number of reasons.

Many, many ordinary people follow legal hunts and that includes vets, nurses, doctors, teachers, bin-men, plumbers, shop workers etc etc. Top level eventers and other horse sport professionals who are held up as examples to aspire to within equestrianism (including Carl Hester) participate in hunting activities yet still the same old tropes about hunting and hunting people are marched out and often by people who clearly have no clue what the actual reality is. Hunting has adapted and will go on adapting. I hope so anyway. I am not bloodthirsty, desperate to kill foxes (at all), ignorant of the countryside, rude to my neighbours, liable to trespass, assault people, facilitate the killing of pets or upsetting of other people; I am fed up of hearing these untruths about hunting people. This current scandal which revolves around less than probably 2% (I haven't calculated it actually but have read all of both transcripts) of the words spoken is just another attack by a bunch of well funded vigilantes who have taken those words and phrases out of context and served them up on a plate for those that want such delicacies. Not widely reported are also the stress on the importance of hunts filing 'honest' reports and recording accidents/incidents etc, never getting involved in conflicts etc.

I totally get why people are easily stirred up by the news and I used to feel quite passionately anti-hunting BUT in this country we don't thankfully have a history of political and social change through vigilante action - which is widely and often violently deployed by the anti-hunt movement who are openly happy to admit to and plan for assualt, trespass and physical intimidation of both people and animals whilst never being prepared to show their faces or reveal their identity. I can't honestly imagine contributing to any reasonable debate on this forum about the subject of hunting though...

 

[hollyandivy123]

In 2015 the BBC reported that the number of people registered with a hunt (trail, drag and blood hound) had increased from the point of the ban to a number around 45,000. Most hunts would accord that the number of people they have is not decreasing; though their country may be becoming more difficult to maintain for a number of reasons.

Many, many ordinary people follow legal hunts and that includes vets, nurses, doctors, teachers, bin-men, plumbers, shop workers etc etc. Top level eventers and other horse sport professionals who are held up as examples to aspire to within equestrianism (including Carl Hester) participate in hunting activities yet still the same old tropes about hunting and hunting people are marched out and often by people who clearly have no clue what the actual reality is. Hunting has adapted and will go on adapting. I hope so anyway. I am not bloodthirsty, desperate to kill foxes (at all), ignorant of the countryside, rude to my neighbours, liable to trespass, assault people, facilitate the killing of pets or upsetting of other people; I am fed up of hearing these untruths about hunting people. This current scandal which revolves around less than probably 2% (I haven't calculated it actually but have read all of both transcripts) of the words spoken is just another attack by a bunch of well funded vigilantes who have taken those words and phrases out of context and served them up on a plate for those that want such delicacies. Not widely reported are also the stress on the importance of hunts filing 'honest' reports and recording accidents/incidents etc, never getting involved in conflicts etc.

I totally get why people are easily stirred up by the news and I used to feel quite passionately anti-hunting BUT in this country we don't thankfully have a history of political and social change through vigilante action - which is widely and often violently deployed by the anti-hunt movement who are openly happy to admit to and plan for assualt, trespass and physical intimidation of both people and animals whilst never being prepared to show their faces or reveal their identity. I can't honestly imagine contributing to any reasonable debate on this forum about the subject of hunting though...

Palo 1......using fox smell to run a trail was always going to be a problem, retraining the fox hounds to follow another scent would have been a more forward thinking approach............as you have to train the foxhounds to follow the fox scent in the first place through pack behaviour it would not be to difficult thing to consider, giving the length of the ban on fox hunting to date

 

[LEC]

In 2015 the BBC reported that the number of people registered with a hunt (trail, drag and blood hound) had increased from the point of the ban to a number around 45,000. Most hunts would accord that the number of people they have is not decreasing; though their country may be becoming more difficult to maintain for a number of reasons.

Many, many ordinary people follow legal hunts and that includes vets, nurses, doctors, teachers, bin-men, plumbers, shop workers etc etc. Top level eventers and other horse sport professionals who are held up as examples to aspire to within equestrianism (including Carl Hester) participate in hunting activities yet still the same old tropes about hunting and hunting people are marched out and often by people who clearly have no clue what the actual reality is.

Locally we have lost 3 hunts. There is a lack of ability to fund it and people to manage the hunt are reducing. Our local hunt which my grandfather hunted with and 2 further generations of my family has gone due to loss of kennels, loss of subscribers and loss of ability to be able to fund it. The committees in all hunts locally which I look at are all quite old and 'new blood' is simply not coming through as its time consuming and hard work.

There are of course some hunts like the Beaufort who are funded by patronage but very few hunts survive this way.

Secondly, agriculture itself has changed a lot in the last 15 years. I discuss with people how the halcyon days of hunting were in the 80s. Then others tell me that the 70s was even better because of agriculture practices, minimal traffice, no sheep fencing, with more land and less smallholding owners. Land has become increasingly tricky to cross. We are surrounded by the Motorway, serious A roads and trainlines. Very few areas are not impacted by increasing urbanisation. The urban sprawl as such with new housing developments. Social media has also had a massive impact on hunting as can be tracked and traced much more easily (unlike Covid).

Hunting I am sure will carry on limping on. There is no appetite at legislative level to ban it especially while a Tory party stays in power. TBH I am not convinced Labour will earlier as technically it has been banned so everyone is happy with limp legislation. Long term, I just think hunting will become obsolete.

 

[teapot]

Do they publish the entire route? I can understand letting foot followers know where each individual hunt starts and ends, or even certain vantage parts where they can watch from the road, but knowing the whole route does take some of the fun and uncertainty out of it, plus runs the risk of pedestrian 'spectators' crossing the route that the quarry have taken and disrupting the scent. Which is why our local pack don't do it.

Yup, a friend follows them and she showed me the OS map marked with every route, and where trails started/finished, for one of the days she followed on. It did seem a tad too 'organised'...

 

[Tiddlypom]

This current scandal which revolves around less than probably 2% (I haven't calculated it actually but have read all of both transcripts) of the words spoken is just another attack by a bunch of well funded vigilantes who have taken those words and phrases out of context and served them up on a plate for those that want such delicacies

I didn’t realise that diluting incriminating statements in amongst more mundane utterings was a valid defence .

I am not a well funded vigilante and I don’t know any, but I am quite capable of reading those transcripts and coming to my own conclusions. I am surprised that you do not recognise that those who trail hunt, legally or not, have been completely stuffed by the Hunting Office mess up.

I once had a conversation with a huntsman who pointed out a copse that had been planted by them 'to encourage the foxes to breed'.

?

Now that is not as mad as it seems. Pre ban, the fox population and the countryside were managed in order to provide healthy foxes to hunt. A lot of good was done year round in order for the pre ban hunts to enjoy their sport - many would say that was done for abhorrent reasons, but nevertheless IMHO the foxes that didn’t get caught by the hunt lived better lives than when it is a free for all.

Yes, that is a real disconnect ?. Fox hunting was of its time, but that time has gone and I have no patience with those who have been deliberately flouting the law at any time since the Hunting Act came in.

 

[palo1]

Palo 1......using fox smell to run a trail was always going to be a problem, retraining the fox hounds to follow another scent would have been a more forward thinking approach............as you have to train the foxhounds to follow the fox scent in the first place through pack behaviour it would not be to difficult thing to consider, giving the length of the ban on fox hunting to date

I agree with this of course but I wasn't involved in drawing up the conditions of the Hunting Act which is a dreadful piece of legislation in many ways.

 

[palo1]

The National Trust have now joined Forestry England in pausing trail hunting on their land.

"...we have taken the decision to pause trail-hunting on National Trust land and will not be granting any new licences for the remainder of the season. We do not currently have a date when this will be reviewed."

This isn't surprising at all. The National Trust have been very ambivalent about all kinds of hunting for several years.

 

[palo1]

I didn’t realise that diluting incriminating statements in amongst more mundane utterings was a valid defence .

I am not a well funded vigilante and I don’t know any, but I am quite capable of reading those transcripts and coming to my own conclusions. I am surprised that you do not recognise that those who trail hunt, legally or not, have been completely stuffed by the Hunting Office mess up.

Now that is not as mad as it seems. Pre ban, the fox population and the countryside were managed in order to provide healthy foxes to hunt. A lot of good was done year round in order for the pre ban hunts to enjoy their sport - many would say that was done for abhorrent reasons, but nevertheless IMHO the foxes that didn’t get caught by the hunt lived better lives than when it is a free for all.

Yes, that is a real disconnect ?. Fox hunting was of its time, but that time has gone and I have no patience with those who have been deliberately flouting the law at any time since the Hunting Act came in.

I am sure you are not personally a well-funded vigilante! I was referring to LACS who are happy to support individuals and groups who are most certainly vigilantes and with no genuine animal rights agenda. The police and home office have rightly identified them as extremists who pose a significant danger.

 

[scruffyponies]

I'm not going to wade in to the debate, except to observe that my experience of hunting people, privately, and in private online spaces, is that they are amongst the most polite, inclusive, welcoming and kind I have ever met. Left to their own devices they spend most of their time sharing soppy pictures of horses and doggies.

Those who think they are 'bloodthirsty toffs' should examine their own prejudices.

 

[Annagain]

Hunting's not for me - I'm not brave enough and the thought of galloping in a group and not being able to stop, let alone having to jump whatever's in my way, makes me go all wobbly legged, even when sitting down! I took my old boy drag hunting (in the pre-ban days) and 3 or 4 times was enough for me to decide no thank you. It didn't help that he got progressively more excited each time to the point that we spent 90% of the last time we went rearing, plunging to pull the reins out of my hands and tanking off!

I get the need to control the fox population but don't think hunting is an efficient way to do that. One man with a gun and maybe a couple of dogs against 40 people on horseback, another 20 on foot, and a pack of dogs? It doesn't compare really in terms of time, resources, damage to land and logistics. A hunt can only hunt a piece of land once or twice a season, a man with a gun can go out several times a week. In terms of the humanity of it, I know a bad shot can cause suffering but I think the difference is there isn't an intention to cause suffering with a gun, the intention is to kill outright and anything else is accidental (although I have no idea how frequent bad shots are). With hunting, the intention was always to chase a fox to the point of exhaustion and then allow the dogs to rip it apart.

 

[Annagain]

duplicate

 

[palo1]

I'm not going to wade in to the debate, except to observe that my experience of hunting people, privately, and in private online spaces, is that they are amongst the most polite, inclusive, welcoming and kind I have ever met. Left to their own devices they spend most of their time sharing soppy pictures of horses and doggies.

Those who think they are 'bloodthirsty toffs' should examine their own prejudices.

Probably the most sensible observation on this thread!!

 

[ycbm]

This current scandal which revolves around less than probably 2% (I haven't calculated it actually but have read all of both transcripts) of the words spoken is just another attack by a bunch of well funded vigilantes who have taken those words and phrases out of context and served them up on a plate for those that want such delicacies.

Please explain how it's possible to take out of context advice to use two different phones, one to compare notes (transcript actually says 'boast about') about the fun you've had and the other to organise and manage the meet, with only that phone to be given to the police in case of an investigation?

 

[Tiddlypom]

United Utilities are also suspending trail hunting on their land until the police/CPS investigation is complete.

https://www.unitedutilities.com/corporate/Trail-hunting-on-our-land/

 

[palo1]

Please explain how it's possible to take out of context advice to use two different phones, one to compare notes (transcript actually says 'boast about') about the fun you've had and the other to organise and manage the meet, with only that phone to be given to the police in case of an investigation?

I don't see much point in engaging with you on this one ycbm but the point is that if you are going to film, with a phone, the activities of sabs you would not ever use a phone that had any personal information on as it is quite possible for that phone to be grabbed by a saboteur/anti and then you would be extremely vulnerable as would your friends, family and connections. Remember, hunt saboteurs have more form and convictions for violence and intimidation than hunts do for illegal hunting. As for the 'boasting' about the fun you have had - I guess many people tell tall hunting tales - the depth and width of the ditch you jumped, how you managed to get your own back on so and so who shut the gate on you last week etc etc. There is usually a great deal of joking, laughing, gossip and fun on the hunting field that you would not want others privy to - and people say things about other folk in the heat of the moment that could be utterly mortifying in the cold light of day too!! I know that you will be imagining that people will be 'boasting' about illegal activities etc etc but really??? do you honestly think that is truly likely? I have NEVER heard anyone boasting about that sort of thing at all. Your imagination and desire to think the worst, without actual specific evidence is running away with you.

 

[ycbm]

The transcript was nothing to do with having personal information the phone Palo. It was advice not to allow the police to see an exchange of communication "boasting about" the hunting.

Yes, I think it's very likely people boasted about the runs they had out illegal hunting. I think illegal hunting was happening much more than you are prepared to accept. It was rife in my area (same as TP's), so much so that when the drag I went with folded, I could not trail hunt within a reasonable traveling distance with any confidence of staying within the law.

I think you are in denial.
.

 

[palo1]

The transcript was nothing to do with having personal information the phone Palo. It was advice not to allow the police to see an exchange of communication "boasting about" the hunting.

Yes, I think it's very likely people boasted about the runs they had out illegal hunting. I think illegal hunting was happening much more than you are prepared to accept. It was rife in my area (same as TP's), so much so that when the drag I went with folded, I could not trail hunt within a reasonable traveling distance with any confidence of staying within the law.

I think you are in denial.
.

Ok. I have read the transcripts too, in full and listened to/watched the webinar footage.

 

[GoldenWillow]

My personal experience with our local hunt is that they do not make any pretence of laying and following a trail as evidenced by going through my field, land that they certainly didn't have permission to be on or any of the adjoining land in a block of around 30 acres. It still makes me furious to think of it years on.

 

[Tiddlypom]

Palo, it is clear that your hunting means a lot to you, but I do not know if your local pack does indeed trail hunt or if it just pretends to. All packs say they hunt legally...

Trespass was very common in these parts for many years, too. Better now as they have gone legit.

I’ve related before how my equine vet hid in an outhouse as her farmer husband ranted at the hunt for crossing the part of his land that they had specifically been asked not to cross. Some of her clients were in the field...

Local farm had many injured cows and milk yield was down for weeks after part of the field crossed land they should not have been on, bringing down fencing and mixing milking and non milking cows. Very little to no apology given.

Re facilitating the killing of pets - hounds deliberately put into a piece of overgrown waste ground to thin out the feral cats while local mad cat woman looks on and wails - was told this by a hunt follower. Ok, these cats weren’t pets as such, but getting hounds to think that cats are fair game is not a great idea.

We all knew that some hunts were flouting the law and were hunting illegally, but the extent of the issue and how it is orchestrated from the top down is breathtaking.

 

[L&M]

This is why the Hunting Act has been such a disaster - either ban it or not, rather than creating such a stupid and unworkable act.

What worries me more is once hunting is banned properly, the antis will then move onto racing, shooting and fishing, and the impact on the rural economy will be devastating, with the country way of life as we know it becoming extinct. Country estates will no longer be viable and more and more land will be sold off for housing, with livestock farmers being increasingly demonised.

I also find it sad that a publication called the 'Horse and Hound' (the clue is in the name) has more activity on the forum from anti's than pro's. I wonder how many people on this forum enjoy 'fun rides' as the majority will disappear as more often than not organised by local packs?

Yes I do hunt and am not a 'blood thirsty toff' - I have a hairy cob, am an animal lover and make a living caring for people with dementia.

I feel very saddened by the current situation, as a few idiots at the MFHA could have just ruined things for the packs that have tried to abide by the law.

 

[Wishfilly]

I don't see much point in engaging with you on this one ycbm but the point is that if you are going to film, with a phone, the activities of sabs you would not ever use a phone that had any personal information on as it is quite possible for that phone to be grabbed by a saboteur/anti and then you would be extremely vulnerable as would your friends, family and connections. Remember, hunt saboteurs have more form and convictions for violence and intimidation than hunts do for illegal hunting. As for the 'boasting' about the fun you have had - I guess many people tell tall hunting tales - the depth and width of the ditch you jumped, how you managed to get your own back on so and so who shut the gate on you last week etc etc. There is usually a great deal of joking, laughing, gossip and fun on the hunting field that you would not want others privy to - and people say things about other folk in the heat of the moment that could be utterly mortifying in the cold light of day too!! I know that you will be imagining that people will be 'boasting' about illegal activities etc etc but really??? do you honestly think that is truly likely? I have NEVER heard anyone boasting about that sort of thing at all. Your imagination and desire to think the worst, without actual specific evidence is running away with you.

I'm sorry, but if anyone is taking things out of context, I would say it is you. It was very clear that the having two phones was in reference to illegal activity.

"So, if you’re in kennels and the police turn up, they can come in and deal with you for the offence, they can search the kennels and if there’s a computer there that they think there’s evidence on, they will seize it. Similarly, they will seize mobile phones and things like that again, looking for evidence. So something for you hunt staff and terriermen, trail layers and everybody to consider, if you’re recording evidence for the Hunting Act, trail laying, whatever, don’t use the same phones or anything you’ve been using for social media and bragging about what you’ve been doing out hunting because if the police get hold of it, you’ll get both sides of it. "

The whole section is about what to do if you are accused of a crime.

For example, this section comes not long after:

"The other thing, there’s no such thing as a friendly chat with the police. Everything is on the record, if you make a voluntary statement they will use it. They will caution you before they question you so they tell you, ‘you don’t have to answer any questions but they will use anything you say in court’ but if you voluntarily tell them something tell them something they will use that as well. "

To be clear, I think it is good for people to know their rights in law BUT I think it is very clear from the context that the speaker believes some people will have been involved in illegal activity.

It's on page 17/18 of this transcript, if anyone wants to read the whole thing: https://www.huntsabs.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Video-2-Transcript.pdf

 

[Wishfilly]

FWIW, my local hunt have a had a bit of a shocker of a season so far- the hounds nearly caused a pile up on a major A road a few weeks back, and in a separate incident, they lost control of their hounds which then chased a pet dog (who, fortunately, was able to escape them).

 

[Tiddlypom]

I also find it sad that a publication called the 'Horse and Hound' (the clue is in the name) has more activity on the forum from anti's than pro's.

But what do you class as an anti?

Anyone who thinks that hunts should indeed trail hunt, and not flout the law and fox hunt? Shouldn’t that be all of us?

 

[Michen]

But what do you class as an anti?

Anyone who thinks that hunts should indeed trail hunt, and not flout the law and fox hunt? Shouldn’t that be all of us?

There are antis and there are people who don balaclavas and are happy to scare or upset animals in their “cause”. I do hope there are none of those on the forum, though sadly I suspect there are, they are most unpleasant and sad individuals.

I will never forget hacking Boggle back along a road, with my ankle dangling and clearly broken with the antis, sabs, whatever you want to call them revving the engine of their 4WD so far up his arse they almost bumped his hocks. All dressed in black with their faces covered. Completely happy to risk injuring my horse.

Anyone, that’s an entirely separate conversation from the purpose of this thread, I’ve yet to read the transcript but will do so this week.

 

[Sandstone1]

There are antis and there are people who don balaclavas and are happy to scare or upset animals in their “cause”. I do hope there are none of those on the forum, though sadly I suspect there are, they are most unpleasant and sad individuals.

I will never forget hacking Boggle back along a road, with my ankle dangling and clearly broken with the “antis” revving the engine of their 4WD so far up his arse they almost bumped his hocks.

Anyone, that’s an entirely separate conversation from the purpose of this thread, I’ve yet to read the transcript but will do so this week.

Sorry to have to state the obvious here but what do you think the hunt is doing if not being happy to scare or upset animals? Pretty sure the fox is fairly scared and upset when its running for its life from a pack of hounds followed by a large group on horseback!

 

[Tiddlypom]

I feel very saddened by the current situation, as a few idiots at the MFHA could have just ruined things for the packs that have tried to abide by the law.

Packs who have tried to abide by the law - and there are some - are going to get stuffed too, sadly.

There were 155 attendees at the second webinar, as the chair mentions the number when he winds the session up. It was not a small group exchanging unwise advice.

 

[shortstuff99]

I'm not sure how anyone can be an animal lover and want to kill animals? I get the fun in doing legal hunting and drag hunting etc, but what fun is there in knowing an animal is chased, terrified and then ripped apart alive?

I don't hunt, as I said before I tried it and a more rude, unwelcoming and frankly horrible bunch of people I could've hoped to meet.

However, I am not against fully compliant hunting and I'm not sure why the community doesn't do more to keep it compliant.