TRAIL HUNTING CONSULTATION

SEL said:
It really isn't a large majority though. Most people couldn't give a šŸ’© about it. They may think it's all about toffs on horses or they may think the idea of chasing foxes is deeply unpleasant but the law has already been changed to make that a criminal offence. The fact that there are so few convictions is because its 1) badly drawn up and 2) not a good use of police / CPS time.

Foxes will continue to be culled and it's naive to think shooting or poisoning are a better death.
Click to expand...

If it wasn't a large majority then they wouldn't have banned it in the first place. Toffs on horses? We really are bringing all the old excuses out tonight.
Was dog fighting banned because it was mainly working class who took part?

It may be a criminal offence to chase foxes but there are hundreds of instances of it happening.

If being chased to exhaustion and then ripped apart by a pack of dogs is such a humane and fast death then why don't they use dogs in slaughter houses? Would be cheaper, solve the stray dog crisis and be oh such a quick and painless death. Perhaps they could use dogs in the human euthinasia clinics??

It's just ridiculous. Shooting, with a proper marksman, is obviously a quicker, more humane way to go.

palo1 said:
I understand your point of view, but don't understand why trail hunting is the animal welfare priority when parliamentary time could be spent genuinely addressing welfare issues that affect far larger numbers of animals in predictably worse ways: killing pigs in gas gondalas for example - the RSPCA reckons that is 9-10 million pigs annually and it is recognized as an appallingly cruel death: or perhaps addressing the 7-10 million hens that have cages the size of a sheet of A4 paper to live in, or addressing 'rescues' that keep all sorts of animals in desperate and cruel conditions. I genuinely don't understand why those provable cruelties are less important than the potential cruelties by abuse of the existing trail hunting law.

What is the moral justification for prioritising lobbying, campaigning funds, parliamentary time and the cost of legislation in relation to trail hunting over all of the more numerous and easy to police animal welfare issues?
Click to expand...

Of all of the cruelty you have mentioned not one of them is done for the pleasure of the spectator.
That's how they differ.
 
Marshpiper said:
Dog fighting, cock fighting (and yes this still is happening) is far far worse than trail hunting, as the abuse it causes to stolen animals for ā€œpractice/baitā€ is, to my mind unimaginableā€¦.
Click to expand...

Who says?

What about the pets torn to shreds in front of their owners by out of control hunt dogs? That abuse dosen't matter I suppose?

If being torn to bits is so fast and such a painless death then why can't we have dog fighting back and keep hunting banned?
Dog fighting, Im sure, would support local economies - with harness makers, dog foods, beer shops and taxation on betting.
They could do some charity stuff through the year to help with community cohesion - pin the tail on the pitbull? Guess the linage - is this dogs brother also its father?
There could be a kids section where they fight poodles.

If you disagree I'm going to tell you that you are ruining a city way of life, you have no idea what your talking about because you live in the country, and that the dogs love it really!
 
moosea said:
It's a waste of money in your opinion, but not in mine.

When allocating police would I rather they investigated a stolen tractor ( that is probably insured, can be replaced and does not feel pain) or a live animal being ripped apart for fun?
I'm sure you can guess which I'd prefer was investigated.
Click to expand...
Because all farmers are rich and deserve to have their stuff nicked?
You definitely belong to the no tractors upsetting my horses and straw and hay should be free brigade. šŸ˜‚
 
moosea said:
If it wasn't a large majority then they wouldn't have banned it in the first place. Toffs on horses? We really are bringing all the old excuses out tonight.
Was dog fighting banned because it was mainly working class who took part?

It may be a criminal offence to chase foxes but there are hundreds of instances of it happening.

If being chased to exhaustion and then ripped apart by a pack of dogs is such a humane and fast death then why don't they use dogs in slaughter houses? Would be cheaper, solve the stray dog crisis and be oh such a quick and painless death. Perhaps they could use dogs in the human euthinasia clinics??

It's just ridiculous. Shooting, with a proper marksman, is obviously a quicker, more humane way to go.



Of all of the cruelty you have mentioned not one of them is done for the pleasure of the spectator.
That's how they differ.
Click to expand...
You should acquaint yourself with the facts and history of the hunting act. It was never a majority that voted for it: it was so much NOT a majority that the Parliament act was invoked to get it, in it's current ambiguous, loophole ridden form over the line. It couldn't complete a full parliamentary process and the Ā£1 million bribe to the labour party was the only reason it got to the House of Commons.

Tony Blair and the legislators are on record as saying it was the wrong thing to do.

How do you feel about millions of pigs suffering in has gondolas? Would you prefer parliamentary time spent on a few hundred foxes that may be hunted rather than those millions of pigs that are definitely suffering appalling deaths, having had pretty miserable lives? I understand that both are awful but in our democracy, we have to identify legislative priorities. You would prefer to tackle the lesser cruelty? Why is that?
 
Sandstone1 said:
The same old whataboutery ! Yes there are other animal welfare issues. Yes there is huge cruelty in the world. However, if you think like that nothing would ever get done about anything! Halal slaughter? oh but what about Gassing pigs? Greyhound racing? But oh what about horse racing. You could go on forever.
Trail hunting will go like it or not and you all know who to blame.
Its going to happen like it or not and yes there are other types of animal abuse but that does not mean a cruel and out dated practice should be allowed to continue.
Click to expand...
Yes, but why would you not prioritise the greater cruelty enacted on a great many more animals and in a situation that could be effectively and efficiently policed? It seems that tackling cruelty is perhaps not the motivation...
 
Clodagh said:
Because all farmers are rich and deserve to have their stuff nicked?
You definitely belong to the no tractors upsetting my horses and straw and hay should be free brigade. šŸ˜‚
Click to expand...

No, not because ' all farmers are rich and deserve to have stuff nicked' But because a tractor won't squeal when they are stripping it down. It won't blleed when they drain its fuel, it's not a living , breathing creature that feels pain.


Clodagh said:
You definitely belong to the no tractors upsetting my horses and straw and hay should be free brigade. šŸ˜‚
Click to expand...


OOOhhh has anyone got ' vague insults that imply fluffiness' on this weeks pro hunting bingo???
 
palo1 said:
You should acquaint yourself with the facts and history of the hunting act. It was never a majority that voted for it: it was so much NOT a majority that the Parliament act was invoked to get it, in it's current ambiguous, loophole ridden form over the line. It couldn't complete a full parliamentary process and the Ā£1 million bribe to the labour party was the only reason it got to the House of Commons.

Tony Blair and the legislators are on record as saying it was the wrong thing to do.

How do you feel about millions of pigs suffering in has gondolas? Would you prefer parliamentary time spent on a few hundred foxes that may be hunted rather than those millions of pigs that are definitely suffering appalling deaths, having had pretty miserable lives? I understand that both are awful but in our democracy, we have to identify legislative priorities. You would prefer to tackle the lesser cruelty? Why is that?
Click to expand...

No, I wouldn't.

I don't eat dead animals- but those that do have the power to change these things by not buying those products.

Perhaps you should aquaint your self with the fact that we are no longer living in the 1800's where it was acceptable to kill a living creature for sport.

Bye bye trail hunting!!
 
palo1 said:
Yes, but why would you not prioritise the greater cruelty enacted on a great many more animals and in a situation that could be effectively and efficiently policed? It seems that tackling cruelty is perhaps not the motivation...
Click to expand...
So what would you say is the motivation?
If you think that in this day and age its ok for a field of riders to chase a animal to its death as a pass time is ok then I really feel there is nothing else to say.
Its all been said here before, the truth is its more than time it was stopped. To chase and kill a animal as a sport in this a day and age is barbaric. If it was really about pest control why would it be done like this? why would you need to encourage foxes just to kill them? Tradition is no excuse for cruelty. The writing is on the wall and its about time.
 
Last edited:
Sandstone1 said:
So what would you say is the motivation?
If you think that in this day and age its ok for a field of riders to chase a animal to its death as a pass time is ok then I really feel there is nothing else to say.
Click to expand...
I have not said that at all. I am asking why, when the chance to have parliamentary time is precious, and legislation expensive, would you choose an animal welfare issue that potentially has less impact than almost any other issue which could substantially benefit a significant animal population? Why a few foxes (who are beautiful and wonderful and deserve to live a natural life) above millions of pigs, or chickens or rats that are legally poisoned and die utterly hideous deaths as a result? What is the animal welfare rationale for using parliamentary time for such a small win?

As for choosing not to eat meat & thus avoid culpability, people have exactly that choice with trail hunting too.
 
moosea said:
No, I wouldn't.

I don't eat dead animals- but those that do have the power to change these things by not buying those products.

Perhaps you should aquaint your self with the fact that we are no longer living in the 1800's where it was acceptable to kill a living creature for sport.

Bye bye trail hunting!!
Click to expand...
Trail hunting has legislation existing to prevent people from killing a living creature for sport - The Hunting Act is that very thing...
 
I did not mention eating meat and as hunting with hounds was banned years ago anyway this is just putting a stop to all the law breakers. We can all go round and round for ever on this subject. Its very very likely to be banned so really best to get used to the idea.
 
palo1 said:
Trail hunting has legislation existing to prevent people from killing a living creature for sport - The Hunting Act is that very thing...
Click to expand...
The hunting community has done this to themselves.

I said long ago on a different thread that if the killing didn't stop that trail hunting would be finished.

And on and on it went .... pets killed, hounds killed, hounds rioting, hound killing fox, hounds killing fox while the hunt looked on, private property damage, public property damaged, violence, threats of violence, riders jumping over people... and on and on and on.

Don't come crying now.
The time to act was when pro hunt members heard about these terrible things.
I wonder how many wrote to the govening bodies to alert them to this behaviour?
How many called it out on the field?

It's sort of ironic that the fox has been hunted all these years, running afraid. Wonder how that feels?
 
My local hunt are not one of the good guys - there are plenty of posts on here with me spitting feathers over their behaviour. Having watched both foxes and deer hear them coming and get out of the way it has always struck me how calmly they take themselves to an area the hounds can't access. The one panicking is usually me needing to get my horses in.

At times in the 12 years I've lived around the area I've found their behaviour selfish, entitled and absolutely likely to be in breach of the hunting act. I STILL think this legislation is a waste of time and money. Foxes won't be culled by a sharp shooting expert marksman - that is expensive. They'll be shot at in the dark by whoever has been asked to do it, or poisoned. That sadly is the knock on effect of the hunting act.

What is to stop "trail" hunts rebranding as "drag" hunts on private land? Are we expecting the police to check if they've laid a synthetic scent? Of course not. It'll be another piece of unenforceable legislation.
 
SEL said:
My local hunt are not one of the good guys - there are plenty of posts on here with me spitting feathers over their behaviour. Having watched both foxes and deer hear them coming and get out of the way it has always struck me how calmly they take themselves to an area the hounds can't access. The one panicking is usually me needing to get my horses in.

At times in the 12 years I've lived around the area I've found their behaviour selfish, entitled and absolutely likely to be in breach of the hunting act. I STILL think this legislation is a waste of time and money. Foxes won't be culled by a sharp shooting expert marksman - that is expensive. They'll be shot at in the dark by whoever has been asked to do it, or poisoned. That sadly is the knock on effect of the hunting act.

What is to stop "trail" hunts rebranding as "drag" hunts on private land? Are we expecting the police to check if they've laid a synthetic scent? Of course not. It'll be another piece of unenforceable legislation.
Click to expand...
Quite. It is utterly unreasonable to expect local police forces to enforce this. It won't stop the sabs or the illegal hunting: much of which may simply go underground with non subscriber foot packs who answer to no-one other than the landowner who has asked them to deal with a fox problem. Catching them will be nigh on impossible - we have had pirate packs on our land and 12& a half couple of hounds (25 hounds) and 6 men in green clothing vanish like wraiths, even when you know the country well. Our local force have literally no chance of stopping them and probably no motivation to do so.

With regulation and appropriate permission I think these foot packs could offer a humane fox control service but I know how many people will see that as support for illegal hunting. It is not that, purely my observation and belief that along with many vets and animal behavior and welfare professionals, this is a humane form of control that could be seasonal and licensed. That isn't going to happen I know!

A trail hunting ban won't help foxes in any way: poisoning and shooting all year round will continue and foxes including nursing vixens will be dug out and killed. Law abiding trail hunts will adapt or fail. People will lose a hobby and for some, a way of life, businesses may lose out where local hunts can't or won't adapt. Illegal hunting may continue. This is not going to protect foxes, I really hope those campaigning for and supporting any hunting legislation really understand that.
 
SEL said:
What is to stop "trail" hunts rebranding as "drag" hunts on private land? Are we expecting the police to check if they've laid a synthetic scent? Of course not. It'll be another piece of unenforceable legislation.
Click to expand...
Indeed.

Which is why drag hunting is in real peril too. Much easier to ban all hunting with hounds whether drag or ā€˜trailā€™, with the possible exception of bloodhounds who follow a human runner.

The hunting community has brought this all on themselves by failing to deal with the naughty hunts in house.
 
Sandstone1 said:
I did not mention eating meat and as hunting with hounds was banned years ago anyway this is just putting a stop to all the law breakers. We can all go round and round for ever on this subject. Its very very likely to be banned so really best to get used to the idea.
Click to expand...
By that logic we could stop car theft or even speeding by banning cars, that would save a lot of human lives.
But we don't need to because there are already laws to address those things. They need to be policed effectively and I doubt that there are many people on here who would argue against increased funding for rural policing, so that hunting laws amongst other things, such as farm vehicle theft, can be policed effectively. A far better use of a huge amount of money than publishing a spurious Consultation document and taking a new law through Parliament when there are so many more laws waiting to be passed, for everyone's benefit.
 
SEL said:
My local hunt are not one of the good guys - there are plenty of posts on here with me spitting feathers over their behaviour. Having watched both foxes and deer hear them coming and get out of the way it has always struck me how calmly they take themselves to an area the hounds can't access. The one panicking is usually me needing to get my horses in.

At times in the 12 years I've lived around the area I've found their behaviour selfish, entitled and absolutely likely to be in breach of the hunting act. I STILL think this legislation is a waste of time and money. Foxes won't be culled by a sharp shooting expert marksman - that is expensive. They'll be shot at in the dark by whoever has been asked to do it, or poisoned. That sadly is the knock on effect of the hunting act.

What is to stop "trail" hunts rebranding as "drag" hunts on private land? Are we expecting the police to check if they've laid a synthetic scent? Of course not. It'll be another piece of unenforceable legislation.
Click to expand...

Out of interest, how many times have you reported them to the police or governing bodies? Just for info.

Well perhaps its time that more thourogh tests cam in for firearm licencing? After all it must be a danger to the public if there are people out there shooting at foxes who can't hit them,

Nothing at all. And that will happen and they will continue with the killing and rioting and all the rest of it and all hunting will be banned. I give it 5 years before it is all banned.


Pearlsasinger said:
By that logic we could stop car theft or even speeding by banning cars, that would save a lot of human lives.
But we don't need to because there are already laws to address those things. They need to be policed effectively and I doubt that there are many people on here who would argue against increased funding for rural policing, so that hunting laws amongst other things, such as farm vehicle theft, can be policed effectively. A far better use of a huge amount of money than publishing a spurious Consultation document and taking a new law through Parliament when there are so many more laws waiting to be passed, for everyone's benefit.
Click to expand...

If we banned cars then, yes it would save lives. But its too inconvenient to ban them.

But cars are not alive, and humans have free choice to get into them. We choose to take those risks knowing what the outcome could be.
Foxes don't have that choice.
 
palo1 said:
I'd really like to know why posters who want a trail (and other) hunting ban think this is a legislative priority? What are the justifications for using parliamentary time and money for this?
Click to expand...
Because its long overdue, because its being used as a smoke screen for illegal hunting and has been for many years, because of the chaos they cause by blocking roads, because of the trespassing on land they should not be on, because of the distress they cause to livestock and horses, because of the pets they kill, because of the distress they cause to people who fear they will kill their pets. because of the trespass on to railway lines which has the chance of causing a accident that could kill many people, because of the cruelty to hounds, because of the cruelty to horses and because they are openly chasing and killing foxes which is illegal, because of police corruption I could go on....
 
Sandstone1 said:
Because its long overdue, because its being used as a smoke screen for illegal hunting and has been for many years, because of the chaos they cause by blocking roads, because of the trespassing on land they should not be on, because of the distress they cause to livestock and horses, because of the pets they kill, because of the distress they cause to people who fear they will kill their pets. because of the trespass on to railway lines which has the chance of causing a accident that could kill many people, because of the cruelty to hounds, because of the cruelty to horses and because they are openly chasing and killing foxes which is illegal, because of police corruption I could go on....
Click to expand...
I understand these things are unacceptable. There are existing laws under which all of these offences can be prosecuted. If you could have parliamentary time for any animal welfare issue, what would you choose?
 
Marshpiper said:
Sandstone, exactly how many proven cases of the incidents you have quoted are there?
I do mean proven, not just media gossipā€¦
Click to expand...
The railway line incident.. The Warwickshire have been done for that, at least one cat killed. Police corruption? Look up the secret deal with Warwickshire hunt.
 
www.bbc.co.uk

Pet cat killed by pack of hunting hounds in Madron

Hunt master John Sampson is found guilty of allowing Mini to be killed by his pack of hounds.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk
www.bbc.co.uk

Warwickshire man found guilty of hunting fox with dogs

Benjamin Halsall, 24, is fined after a magistrates' court is shown footage of a fox being killed.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk
magistrates.blogspot.com

Warwickshire Hunt Whipper-In Convicted of Unlawful Hunting

News and views from a Magistrates' Court somewhere near you. Find out what it's like to be a Justice of the Peace.
magistrates.blogspot.com magistrates.blogspot.com
www.coventrytelegraph.net

Warwickshire Hunt group to appear in court over alleged fox death

Warwickshire Hunt Limited and Benjamin Halsall will appear in court
www.coventrytelegraph.net www.coventrytelegraph.net
Is that enough? Will post more when I have time.
protectthewild.substack.com

Warwickshire Hunt charged under the Hunting Act

Only second hunting body to be charged since Hunting Act came into force.
protectthewild.substack.com protectthewild.substack.com
www.bbc.co.uk

Three charged after police investigation into Somerset hunt

The men will appear in court in April after being charged with hunting a wild mammal with dogs.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk

hounds shot by hunt - Search Videos

Watch videos instantly on Bingā€”enjoy direct playback, discover related clips, and dive into trending content all in one place.
www.bing.com www.bing.com
nwhsa.wordpress.com

Co Down woman heartbroken after beloved pet cat ā€˜torn apartā€™ by hunt dogs in her garden

13th January 2026 Chloe Crozier, from outside Banbridge, was left heartbroken when her much-loved pet, Rodney, was killed by dogs taking part in a fox hunt in the area. Animal lover, Ms Crozier desā€¦
nwhsa.wordpress.com nwhsa.wordpress.com
A few more.... No doubt there will be excuses. It took 5 min to find these. There are many many more.
 
Last edited:
palo1 said:
I understand these things are unacceptable. There are existing laws under which all of these offences can be prosecuted. If you could have parliamentary time for any animal welfare issue, what would you choose?
Click to expand...
There are indeed many many animal welfare issues but this issue of trail hunting needs to be sorted out its been dragging on for years and as the saying goes " Each journey starts with a single step" So yes, I would say trail hunting.
 
Sandstone1 said:
www.bbc.co.uk

Pet cat killed by pack of hunting hounds in Madron

Hunt master John Sampson is found guilty of allowing Mini to be killed by his pack of hounds.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk
www.bbc.co.uk

Warwickshire man found guilty of hunting fox with dogs

Benjamin Halsall, 24, is fined after a magistrates' court is shown footage of a fox being killed.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk
magistrates.blogspot.com

Warwickshire Hunt Whipper-In Convicted of Unlawful Hunting

News and views from a Magistrates' Court somewhere near you. Find out what it's like to be a Justice of the Peace.
magistrates.blogspot.com magistrates.blogspot.com
www.coventrytelegraph.net

Warwickshire Hunt group to appear in court over alleged fox death

Warwickshire Hunt Limited and Benjamin Halsall will appear in court
www.coventrytelegraph.net www.coventrytelegraph.net
Is that enough? Will post more when I have time.
protectthewild.substack.com

Warwickshire Hunt charged under the Hunting Act

Only second hunting body to be charged since Hunting Act came into force.
protectthewild.substack.com protectthewild.substack.com
www.bbc.co.uk

Three charged after police investigation into Somerset hunt

The men will appear in court in April after being charged with hunting a wild mammal with dogs.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk

hounds shot by hunt - Search Videos

Watch videos instantly on Bingā€”enjoy direct playback, discover related clips, and dive into trending content all in one place.
www.bing.com www.bing.com
nwhsa.wordpress.com

Co Down woman heartbroken after beloved pet cat ā€˜torn apartā€™ by hunt dogs in her garden

13th January 2026 Chloe Crozier, from outside Banbridge, was left heartbroken when her much-loved pet, Rodney, was killed by dogs taking part in a fox hunt in the area. Animal lover, Ms Crozier desā€¦
nwhsa.wordpress.com nwhsa.wordpress.com
A few more.... No doubt there will be excuses. It took 5 min to find these. There are many many more.
Click to expand...


So why is there a need for further legislation? What we have already is obviously effective.
 
palo1 said:
I'd really like to know why posters who want a trail (and other) hunting ban think this is a legislative priority? What are the justifications for using parliamentary time and money for this?
Click to expand...

The justification for using parliamentary time?
Becuse the hunting act is obviously insufficient to prevent deliberate fox hunting.
If trail hunting ( or all hunting with hounds) is banned there will be financial recompense in the long term through less resources going to policing and prosecuting those who behave as if the law does not apply to them.

Pearlsasinger said:
So why is there a need for further legislation? What we have already is obviously effective.
Click to expand...
Haha! I think sandstone has covered this!
If hunts had stuck to the spirit of the law we wouldn't be at this point.
It was so simple., don't kill foxes, don't chase foxes, keep your dogs under control and be considerate of the public.
The hunts and hunt members have failed, repeatedly, on all of those things.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top