Torment of a stag: caught on film

[Reginald]

Animal cruelty: Torment of a stag
The Independent
13 November 2007

Police are to investigate video footage allegedly showing "barbaric" and "inhumane" treatment of a stag by huntsmen on National Trust land.

The incident, captured on camera by animal rights campaigners, shows the creature being chased for more than two hours by dogs and a rider, who is seen cracking his whip at the animal which is clearly frightened and exhausted [WHAT A BRAVE MAN HE MUST BE].

The League Against Cruel Sports alleges the Devon and Somerset Staghounds acted illegally in chasing the stag, which was eventually shot, over a long distance at Dunkery Beacon in Somerset on 14 August. It also says these "barbaric" actions show the hunt is not fit to dispatch stags and was contravening National Trust guidelines. These allow a hunt on to Trust land only to dispatch stags which are sick or injured, and state categorically that animals must not be chased.

The hunt denies any wrongdoing and says its members were culling the stag, which it says was old, in accordance with hunting laws.

However, the allegations made by the league are deeply embarrassing for the National Trust which caused uproar earlier this year when it announced it planned to reverse a long-standing ban on hunts on all of its estates. The decision was taken to allow the culling of stags on its land. The trust said this could be an effective and humane way of dealing with deer on its property in the Quantock Hills and Exmoor.

The pro-hunting lobby argues that hunting with hounds is the most humane way of managing deer and foxes, but welfare activists say it legitimises hunting as a sport. The league said that it believed that the Devon and Somerset Staghounds was using dogs to chase the stag. The law states that the hunt is only allowed to use two dogs to flush out animals.

"These pictures show the shocking truth about how the people chosen by the trust to kill animals behave," said a spokesman. "It's like allowing paedophiles to help out with a mother and toddler group. This animal was exhausted, terrified and tormented. This was the pursuit of a deer for fun. It was not a cull, it was slaughter. It was barbaric and inhumane."

The Devon and Somerset Staghounds refuted the league's claims and said it was acting within the law, had permission to be on the land and said the stag was one "suitable for culling" because it was old.

Tom Yandle, chairman of the hunt, said that the horseman had cracked the whip near the animal to turn it back towards the waiting guns. He added that the new restrictions on hunting brought in by the Government were partly to blame for how animals are killed.

"I don't think the Hunting Act produces humanity," said Mr Yandle. "It would be much better for the animals if the Act had not happened but I don't see how chasing the deer and riding alongside it and cracking a whip is any more inhumane than any other form of moving a deer around." [AND MORE HUMANE THAN SIMPLY STALKING AND SHOOTING IT?]

The trust confirmed it had been called to an incident on 14 August. It said it had no power to ban the hunt from this part of Dunkery Beacon and had no control over its activities because the trust did not hold the hunting rights.

However, anyone who controls or manages land where hunting takes place has a responsibility under the Act.

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/this_britain/article1222084.ece

 

[DingDongScabiousOnHi]

The hunting act bans hunting with dogs. It says nothing about other forms of moving deer around.

Incidently there was a lot of fuss a couple of years ago about LACS driving vehicles at deer for the same purpose, so they could be shot. That IS totally illegal.

Don't forget that under the law if the deer are flushed out by dogs reasonable steps have to be taken to shoot them.

Is cracking a whip at a deer more cruel than driving a ca at one? I'm not sure.

The Judge in the Quantocks Appeal ruled that they should use TEN guns to shoot the entire herd of deer if flushed out. Whereas previously the staghounds would only have shot ONE.

 

[DingDongScabiousOnHi]

Also that was a Mazda CX-7 not a stag.

 

[oakash]

Yes, if you antis on here want to see real cruelty, then see what happens to deer in the absence of the Devon & Somerset Staghounds being able to cull them selectively.

Look, you antis have a LOT of animal cruelty to answer for. Don't you realize that hunting pre-ban was as much about conservation as culling? Dont you know that now the hunt has, in effect, had its teeth pulled, then indiscriminate shooting of deer is widespread? The hunting act is to blame. If you antis really cared for animals you would be standing side by side with hunt supporters, determined to get our bigotted MPs to overturn this stupid and cruel law. (..and I am not a staghunter!)

 

[Eagle_day]

Weren't helicopters being used to cull deer in Scotland last year?

Now that truly is barbaric.

 

[Ravenwood]

Since the hunting ban, there has been widespread indescriminate poaching of deer. The NT has trained and provided rangers with rifles and towers to shoot off deer, again indesciminately with a target of about 100 deer/yr. Realising that this was not ethical they have allowed the hunt back on the land to do a proper and effective job of culling the deer (ie old and injured). If they don't hold the hunting rights ie over Dunkery and Winsford Hill then they have no authority on any hunting activity.

At the rate it is going now, ie with poaching and flushing to shot (not giving a fit deer the chance to get away) there will be little if no deer left on Exmoor.

 

[Boudicea]

Well Eagle day, since you are such an informed and astute member of the hunting fore, you tell me why they had to use helicopters?

Oh deer deer deer (scuse the pun) but wouldn't your horses have a wee bit of a problem in that landscape? and it is quite a few miles for a man to walk with dogs eh?

But it is truly barbaric compared to your way? Thought you all stuck together and understood landscape and terrain no?

 

[Boudicea]

Phsst and by the way (whispers) believe it or not deer have been culled that way for a looong time.

 

[Ravenwood]

Phsst and by the way (whispers) believe it or not deer have been culled that way for a looong time.

And does that make it right?

 

[tkmaxx]

Let me get this straight. It's okay to chase deer with helicopters because it's been done for years but the sheer fact that hunting with hounds is centuries old, albeit not in it's current format, means it's outdated and therefore should be scrapped.
Flaw, anyone?

 

[Ravenwood]

Incidently there was a lot of fuss a couple of years ago about LACS driving vehicles at deer for the same purpose, so they could be shot. That IS totally illegal.

LACS were actually caught on video shooting deer from a vehicle - yet nothing was done about it!!

I don't know about helicopters but obviously they have more money than sense.

 

[AmyMay]

I love hunting - however, have really never 'got' stag hunting.

It's big enough to see - doesn't need to be chased by hounds to be caught, all you've got to do is shoot it!

 

[soggy]

Just another of the LACS desperate pathetic attempts to clutch at any straws possible. Reads like a comedy of the silent movie era.

 

[severnmiles]

Phsst and by the way (whispers) believe it or not deer have been culled that way for a looong time.

Funny how when we say hunting has been in practise for centuries you say it doesn't make it right, so why on earth you think just because deer have been culled in that way for a 'long time' it makes it any more correct?

 

[Reginald]

Why chase the deer with hounds at all? Why not just stalk and shoot it if it needs culling? This is what Burns suggested in his report. This is how 85% of deer are killed in Exmoor. How can chasing a deer for two hours, cracking a whip at it be anything other than cruel? How can anyone get any enjoyment out of this? More to the point, how can the huntsman look at himself in the mirror and not feel enormous shame at his own conduct?

 

[soggy]

85% of deer killed on Exmoor are stalked. Really?

Where haver you dreamed those figures up from?

Burns suggested no such thing either! You really must stop all this guessing at facts and truths Hymie.

If he had been allowed to hunt the stag in the traditional way it would have all been over a lot sooner. I don't suppose he did enjoy it but it need to be done and thats how the law states that it has to be done.

He'll look himself in the mirror and know that he has done the right thing, within the rules and regulations and done it to the best of his ability.

I bet you would like to be able to do the same thing each time you look in the mirror. Only you can't! Can you?

 

[Reginald]

- "85% of deer killed on Exmoor are stalked. Really? Where haver you dreamed those figures up from?"

Burns report: "The total number of deer killed by the packs, excluding casualties, is thought to represent about 15% of the number which it is estimated need to be killed to prevent the population increasing in the area."

- "Burns suggested no such thing either [that deer should be stalked and shot]! You really must stop all this guessing at facts and truths Hymie [sic]."

Burns report: "Stalking, if carried out to a high standard and with the availability of a dog or dogs to help find any wounded deer that escape, is in principle the better method of culling deer from an animal welfare perspective. In particular, it obviates the need to chase the deer in the way which occurs in hunting."

- "If he had been allowed to hunt the stag in the traditional way it would have all been over a lot sooner."

This deer was chased for two hours. Burns report: "Recent research indicates that, in the case of deer that are killed, the average duration of the hunt is about three hours."

- "I don't suppose he did enjoy it"

If he doesn't enjoy it why do it?

- "but it need to be done"

It didn't need to be "done" in this manner, as Burns points out.

- "and thats how the law states that it has to be done."

The law states no such thing. The Hunting Act prohibits a number of activities, activities which allegedly the hunt in question nevertheless indulged in.

- "He'll look himself in the mirror and know that he has done the right thing, within the rules and regulations and done it to the best of his ability."

He's cracked his whip at an exhausted creature to the best of his ability? And you admire him for that?

- "I bet you would like to be able to do the same thing each time you look in the mirror. Only you can't! Can you?"

I don't think I'm a better person necessarily than this huntsman. What I do know is that I couldn't and wouldn't do what he does and I suspect the same goes for the vast majority of country folk.

 

[DingDongScabiousOnHi]

The worst thing about the Judgement in the Quantocks Staghounds case was that the judge ruled that because dfeer were herd animals TEN guns have to be present during flushing iun order to kill the entire herd of deer if flushed.

The Hunting Act runs the risk of demoting the status of the Red Deer from that of quarry to pest. This s not in the interest of deer conservation. A quarry's population is maintained. A pest's population is eliminated.

The Red Deer population on Exmoor is very finely balanced. The Government have upset that balance but have no interest in the effect of their legislation. They have done nothing to monitor the effect of the Hunting act on Red deer numbers or welfare.

 

[Reginald]

Why can't all deer be culled by stalking, as Lord Burns suggested? It's not necessary to flush them at all. The answer, of course, is that the hunters like the chase, so are trying to get around the Hunting Act. In other words, they consider the welfare of the deer far less important than their own pleasure-seeking.

 

[DingDongScabiousOnHi]

I don't want to kill the deer. I want to get them out of my woodland.

That's why I flush them out of it.

Why should I have to kill them at all?

 

[Eagle_day]

Well Eagle day, since you are such an informed and astute member of the hunting fore [sic, forum?], you tell me why they had to use helicopters?

I don't know. It is, however, illegal to shoot deer from a vehicle, which I would imagine includes helicopters.

Oh, and it's 'Boudica'.

 

[soggy]

Burns report: "The total number of deer killed by the packs, excluding casualties, is thought to represent about 15% of the number which it is estimated need to be killed to prevent the population increasing in the area."

"Thought", "estimated"!!! An statement big enough to drive a [/quote]coach and 4 through! If thats all you have, you are sadly mistaken. Just ask the experts The National Park management team if you doubt me.

Burn"s report: Stalking, if carried out to a high standard and with the availability of a dog or dogs to help find any wounded deer that escape, is in principle the better method of culling deer from an animal welfare perspective. In particular, it obviates the need to chase the deer in the way which occurs in hunting."

Burns nor you seem very clued up on the practicalities of deer management on Exmoor. Generalities such as that which you have quotes, when taken out of context prove nowt. Other than the posters ignorance of the subject matter.

Burns report: "Recent research indicates that, in the case of deer that are killed, the average duration of the hunt is about three hours."

Another generalisation.

If he doesn't enjoy it why do it?

Because it need to be done!

[/quote]It didn't need to be "done" in this manner, as Burns points out. [/quote]

Was Burns there? No! So how does he know what was needed?

The law states no such thing. The Hunting Act prohibits a number of activities, activities which allegedly the hunt in question nevertheless indulged in.

We're dealing with facts here not allegations. The facts are.That the law now stipulates what the Hunts can and cant do. The hunt was actibf quite legitimately within the law as laid down.

- "He'll look himself in the mirror and know that he has done the right thing, within the rules and regulations and done it to the best of his ability."

He's cracked his whip at an exhausted creature to the best of his ability? And you admire him for that?

Who say's it was exhausted? You , the LACS or a State Vet? Only the latter is qualified to make such a claim. I admire him for doing his job under difficult and extreme circumstances=ces and idiotic and fool hardy restrictions.

- "I bet you would like to be able to do the same thing each time you look in the mirror. Only you can't! Can you?"

I don't think I'm a better person necessarily than this huntsman. What I do know is that I couldn't and wouldn't do what he does and I suspect the same goes for the vast majority of country folk.

We all make choices in life, you have made yours and I have made mine. As for the majority of country folk not wanting to do as the huntsman did. An empty and foolish claim considering Hunting has never been more popular or as well supported by country folk and urbanites .

 

[soggy]

I don't know. It is, however, illegal to shoot deer from a vehicle,

Not since Oct 1st when the law changed. As long as the vehicle is stationary and the engine is switched off.

Helicopters were used for speed of transportation of the contact cullers and due to the necessity to cover large tracts of difficult and oft time untraversable by motor vehicle terrain.

 

[DingDongScabiousOnHi]

Swirching the engine off on a helicopter is a little stupid.

Although I am told they do glide.

 

[soggy]

Swirching the engine off on a helicopter is a little stupid.

Although I am told they do glide.

Like the proverbial house brick!

 

[DingDongScabiousOnHi]

If you were above a fair size herd of red deer you could probably aim it towards them

 

[suestowford]

Why chase the deer with hounds at all? Why not just stalk and shoot it if it needs culling?

I normally stay out of this sort of thing but I feel I must attempt to answer this point. Reginald, if you came to Exmoor you would see that large parts of it are possibly suitable for stalking in that there are huge great sweeps of hill on which you can see for a long distance. However, there are also many very steep combes which are mostly thickly wooded, so thickly wooded that it would be near impossible for a person to stalk safely through there. This sort of place is where the hounds come into their own, IMO, as they can move through this sort of stuff and as they use their noses, they can track a deer through it where a human would struggle to see anything at all.

This is particularly important if someone is attempting to find a deer which has been injured (whether from a poor shot or being hit by a car), as the deer will often lie up in the woods and hide when injured. Hounds can find them, people would struggle to see them and I fear that some of these deer have died a lingering death simply because they cannot be found.

 

[Reginald]

jacksprat, thank you for your courteous post - I'll try to reply in kind.

I'd be more convinced by what you say if the great majority of deer culled in Exmoor (and this was pre-"ban") weren't killed by stalkers. Lord Burns estimated only 15% of deer were accounted for by hunts. Moreover, as Burns again points out, the hunt staff themselves stalk the deer the day before the chase in order to select suitable creatures to kill:

"The harbourer and assistants will track the individual deer's whereabouts the previous day and return there early in the morning of the hunt to make sure it is still in the same place."

I take on board you point about injured deer. That's why I agree with Burns that the stalker would have dogs on hand to track the animal if it escaped injured.

 

[DingDongScabiousOnHi]

But what if the deer already is injured?

 

[Grumpy Herbert]

Have strayed onto this forum again, sorry!

Reginald, I am an anti too. I have lived in the countryside all my life, I work, don't vote Labour (would rather nail my feet to the floor) and am not against all blood sports - just the ones that chase animals to the point of exhaustion before killing them. (to me it seems unnecessary and cruel to do that)

But this is a HUNTING forum! Why come onto it and be deliberately controversial? You must know that you will not change any huntsmans mind about hunting, just as they won't change your anti views. To be fair to the hunting crowd, they don't hijack the other forums to promote pro hunting views, so isn't it fair enough to leave this forum for them to discuss what they enjoy doing? There are plenty of other outlets for anti hunt views!