| Report of Committee of Inquiry into Hunting with Dogs in England &Wales | ||||
|
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Chapter 1 1 The Committee was asked to inquire into the practical aspects of different types of hunting with dogs and its impact on the rural economy, agriculture and pest control, the social and cultural life of the countryside, the management and conservation of wildlife, and animal welfare in particular areas of England and Wales; the consequences for these issues of any ban on hunting with dogs; and how any ban might be implemented. 2 We were asked to focus on the hunting with dogs of foxes, deer, hares and mink. The use of dogs solely to locate or retrieve quarry was excluded from our terms of reference. We were not asked to recommend whether hunting should be banned. Nor were we asked to consider moral or ethical issues. 3 The Committee gathered information through an open process of written and oral evidence, research reports, seminars, meetings and visits. Chapter 2 4 Hunting with dogs is a diverse activity. 5 There are about 200 registered packs of hounds (mainly foxhounds but also some harriers) in England and Wales which hunt foxes, plus a number of unregistered packs in Wales. Most packs have mounted followers but a number, including the Fell packs in Cumbria and the footpacks in Wales, are followed on foot only. The Welsh gunpacks use dogs to flush foxes to waiting guns. 6 The registered packs are estimated to kill some 21,000-25,000 foxes a year. About 40% of the foxes killed by the registered packs are killed in the autumn/cub hunting season. In Wales and other upland areas, a high proportion of foxes are dug out, using terriers, and shot. Outside the registered packs, many more foxes are dug out and shot or are killed by people using lurchers or other "long dogs". Some of these activities are carried out by farmers, landowners and gamekeepers. Others involve trespass. 7 There are three registered staghound packs in the Devon and Somerset area. They kill about 160 red deer a year in total, excluding injured deer which they dispatch. This probably represents about 15% of the numbers which need to be culled in the area to maintain a stable population. 8 There are about a hundred registered packs of hounds (beagles, bassets and harriers) which hunt hares. They kill about 1,650 hares a season, a very small percentage of the number killed by shooting. 9 There are some 24 registered hare coursing clubs, which kill about 250 hares a year in total, and a small number of other unregistered clubs. But there is a good deal of illegal hunting/coursing in some areas. 10 The 20 minkhound packs kill somewhere between 400 - 1,400 mink a season. The number is thought to be considerably smaller than that killed by trapping and shooting. Chapter 3 11 Hunting, especially in its organised form, needs to be seen in a wider economic and social context. The population of rural areas is increasing and new service industries have been established. But agriculture has been in serious decline, and the new jobs tend to be in less remote areas. 12 There is a complex set of relationships between hunting and a diverse range of other economic activities, mostly in rural areas, and largely horse-related, that either directly serve hunting or are in some way dependent on it. 13 There have been widely varying estimates given in recent years for the loss of jobs which would result from a ban on hunting. 14 The research which we commissioned attempted to estimate the jobs (full-time equivalents, FTEs) which currently depend on hunting, either directly or indirectly. 15 It is relatively straightforward to estimate the number of jobs which the hunts provide. It is much more difficult to estimate the other jobs which depend, directly or indirectly, on hunting. Identifying the number of participants and allocating their expenditure between hunting and other equestrian activities is particularly problematic. 16 Estimating the effects of a ban is also complex. It is necessary to take account of other factors such as the extent to which alternative activities would replace hunting, how the money currently used would be spent, other changes taking place in the rural economy and the differential impact in different areas. 17 It is difficult too to estimate the effects of a ban on hunting on individuals. These must take into account the extent to which the people concerned would be able to switch to other available employment, as well as the part-time and seasonal nature of many jobs. 18 We estimate that somewhere between 6,000 and 8,000 full-time equivalent jobs presently depend on hunting, although the number of people involved may be significantly higher. About 700 of these jobs (involving some 800 people) result from direct employment by the hunts. Another 1,500 to 3,000 full-time equivalent jobs (perhaps involving some 2,500 to 5,000 people) result from direct employment on hunting-related activities by those who are engaged in hunting. The remaining jobs, in a wide variety of businesses, are indirectly dependent on hunting. Of these, many will be in urban, rather than rural, areas. (Paragraph 3.43) 19 In view of all the uncertainties, it is not possible to give a precise figure for the number of jobs which would be lost if hunting were banned. In terms of national employment statistics, the short-term loss would be limited, and extend not much further than those employed by the hunt, and some employed by those hunt followers who immediately reduced their use of horses. In the medium term, say three to five years, more losses would occur as hunt followers brought their horse numbers into line with current use. Losses would also arise in the wider rural economy, in particular the horse economy, although in part they would be offset by other changes, including expenditure being diverted into other activities. In the long term, say seven to ten years, most (if not all) of the effects would be offset as resources were diverted to new activities and the rural economy adjusted to other economic forces. (Paragraph 3.72) 20 In terms of national resource use, the economic effects of a ban on hunting would be unlikely to be substantial, especially in the context of the drastic changes taking place in the agricultural sector. However, at least in the short and medium term, the individual and local effects would be more serious. Most jobs that are directly dependent on hunting are in the land-based sector. Some of those directly affected have specialised skills which would not transfer easily, and they would find it hard to find alternative employment. For these people especially, the adjustment process could be painful. Some thought would have to be given to the possibilities for re-training and acquiring new skills. (Paragraph 3.73) 21 For some businesses that are on the borderline of viability, the loss of revenue could lead to a bigger impact than the direct effect may suggest. For a small number of local communities which depend to a significant extent on hunting, and where there are limited alternative employment opportunities, the effects could also be more serious. (Paragraph 3.74) 22 Farmers would lose the benefit of a recreation they value. In addition, many of them would feel that they had suffered an economic loss since a free "pest control" service would have been removed; they would expect more predation of lambs, poultry, piglets and game birds; and they would lose the "fallen stock" service provided by many hunts. The negative impacts of a ban would be particularly resented because they would be viewed as unnecessary by many of those affected, and as an avoidable addition to other problems facing the farming community. (Paragraph 3.75) Chapter 4 23 It is commonly argued that hunting plays a critical role in the social and cultural life of rural communities. Hunting is itself a social activity, and hunts organise a wide range of social and sporting events. But it is also important to see hunting, especially organised hunting, in its wider context. It is a highly co-operative social activity taking place in a rural setting. Different people value different aspects but farmers and landowners are at its heart. Rural communities are diverse and changing but farmers, as a group, feel that their interests and way of life are not understood by central government and the urban majority. 24 The research which we commissioned examined the relative importance of hunting to the social and cultural life of four rural communities where hunting is actively pursued. Among the findings were that there were higher levels of support for hunting than previous surveys have suggested; that support tends to be based not so much on importance to the individual - although this was true for hunt participants and some farmers - but a belief that hunting had greater significance for the community as a whole and for others living there; that hunt-based social activities play a significant part in the social life of these communities, but are not as significant as those of the local pub or church; that support for hunting, and a belief in its importance to individuals and to the local community, was particularly strong in the Devon and Somerset study area; and that a significant minority who were opposed to hunting would welcome its abolition. 25 It is not possible simply to extrapolate these findings since the areas studied deliberately focused on those in which organised hunting actively takes place, rather than rural communities in general. 26 Rural communities are diverse. Many, especially those near urban centres, have experienced substantial changes in recent years as agriculture has declined in importance, communications have improved and people have moved in from towns. The part played by hunting in the social and cultural life of rural communities varies greatly, depending on factors such as their proximity to urban centres and the type of hunting taking place. (Paragraph 4.52) 27 The social activities organised by the hunts form an important feature of the social life of those communities in which hunting is actively pursued. For a significant minority, notably hunt participants and farmers in more isolated rural communities, the hunts play a dominant role. The loss of these activities, if that were the outcome of a ban on hunting, would be keenly felt. For those who take part, hunting is itself partly a social event, particularly during the winter months when alternative activities are scarce. For others, the social activities organised by the hunts are significant, but less so than those organised by other groups, in particular the pub and the church. Even those who would not feel greatly, at a personal level, the loss of the hunts' social activities consider that it would have a detrimental effect on the social life of others and on community life in general. A number would also feel that it would mark the end of an important, living cultural tradition. The precise balance between these different responses would vary from region to region and area to area. Generally, however, the impact would be felt most strongly in the more isolated rural areas. In areas of greater population density where there are more alternative activities available, and where the population is more socially diverse, a ban would make less of a social impact. (Paragraph 4.53) 28 It is clear that, especially for participants in more isolated rural communities, hunting acts as a significant cohesive force, encouraging a system of mutual support. Farmers and other landowners - many of whom feel increasingly isolated - are both the linchpins and the main beneficiaries of the system. Many of them also value hunting as an expression of a traditional, rural way of life and would strongly resent what they would see as an unnecessary and ill-informed interference with it. As a result it would increase their sense of alienation. (Paragraph 4.54) 29 For another group, the hunt itself seems divisive, intrusive and disruptive. (Paragraph 4.55) 30 Because the organisation of point-to-points relies heavily on voluntary labour supplied by hunt followers and supporters, there could be difficulties in running these events. Pony clubs also often depend heavily on hunt followers and supporters. To a lesser extent these too could be affected by a ban. These activities should be able to continue provided alternative forms of organisation develop. (Paragraph 4.56) Chapter 5 Foxes 31 The pre-breeding population of foxes in England and Wales is thought to number some 217,000. They are perceived as pests mainly because of predation on lambs and game birds, although there are marked regional variations. Farmers and gamekeepers consider that they need a range of methods to control foxes. There is little information about the numbers of foxes which are killed and by what methods. Shooting is the most common method, but the use of dogs is particularly prevalent in sheep-rearing upland areas. 32 In most areas of England and Wales farmers, landowners and gamekeepers consider that it is necessary to manage fox populations in view of the damage which foxes can cause to farming and game management interests. (Paragraph 5.40) 33 Methods involving guns probably account for the greater part of those foxes which are deliberately killed, but there are marked regional variations. (Paragraph 5.41) 34 In lowland areas hunting by the registered packs makes only a minor contribution to the management of the fox population, and terrierwork, especially by gamekeepers, may be more important. In these areas, in the event of a ban, other means of control have the potential to replace the hunts' role in culling foxes. (Paragraph 5.42) 35 In upland areas, where the fox population causes more damage to sheep-rearing and game management interests, and where there is a greater perceived need for control, fewer alternatives are available to the use of dogs, either to flush out to guns or for digging-out. (Paragraph 5.43) Deer 36 There are estimated to be about 4,000-6,000 red deer in the areas hunted by the three registered packs in Devon and Somerset. About 1,000 deer need to be culled each year to maintain a stable population. The hunts kill about 160 deer each year, excluding the "casualty" deer which they dispatch. 37 The population needs to be managed, mainly because of the damage which deer cause to agricultural, forestry and conservation interests and because the numbers would otherwise increase substantially. Apart from hunting, the only other method of culling deer is by stalking/shooting. 38 It is generally accepted that red deer numbers in Devon and Somerset need to be controlled. Hunting with dogs presently accounts for about 15% of the annual cull needed to maintain the population at its present level. However, because of the widespread support which it enjoys, and consequent tolerance by farmers of deer, hunting at present makes a significant contribution to management of the deer population in this area. In the event of a ban, some overall reduction in total deer numbers might occur unless an effective deer management strategy was implemented, which was capable of promoting the present collective interest in the management of deer and harnessing such interest into sound conservation management. (Paragraph 5.75) Hares 39 There are about 630,000 brown hares in England and Wales. They are most abundant in eastern England, where high numbers are often encouraged for shooting purposes. Hares are regarded, at most, as a minor agricultural pest. About 1,650 hares are killed by hunting by the registered packs and about 250 by the registered coursing clubs. Much larger numbers are killed by shooting and illegal coursing. 40 There is little or no need to control overall hare numbers and, indeed, they are a Biodiversity Action Plan species. However, the distribution of hares is uneven: they are abundant in some areas, mainly in the east of England, and scarce in much of Wales and the West Country. Hare hunting and coursing are essentially carried out for recreational purposes and have a relatively small direct impact on hare numbers. A ban would therefore have little effect in practice on agriculture or other interests. (Paragraph 5.94) 41 Because hare numbers tend to be maintained at high levels in areas where hunting/coursing occurs, the impact of a ban might well be that, in the absence of other changes, the population would decline in those areas. This would partly result from a loss of suitable habitat but also, in a few areas, from the shooting of hares to deter poaching and illegal coursing. However, in comparison with the impact of organised shooting on hare numbers, a ban on hare hunting and coursing would have a negligible effect. (Paragraph 5.95) Mink 42 Mink are not a native species. Following their introduction to Britain mink rapidly increased in their distribution and abundance. However, over the last 10 years mink populations have declined substantially, and are now an estimated 18,000 in England and Wales. Mink prey on a wide variety of mammals, birds and fish. Trapping is the main method of killing mink, but mink hunts probably account for between 400-1,400 mink a year. 43 Mink can cause localised damage to poultry, gamebirds, fishing and wildlife interests. Because mink hunts kill relatively small numbers of mink, and because of their high fecundity and ability to disperse, hunting does not have any significant effect on the mink population at a national or regional level. It can, however, lead to temporary reductions in the mink population in specific localities.(Paragraph 5.121) 44Trapping is potentially an effective means of control but it needs to be carried out fairly intensively from January to April every year to have a lasting impact. It is therefore relatively costly. Hunting can be helpful in providing a free service to farmers and others that identifies where mink are located, enabling them to target trapping efforts more effectively. (Paragraph 5.122) Chapter 6 45 The issues of cruelty and animal welfare are central to the debate about hunting. Animal welfare is essentially concerned with assessing the ability of an animal to cope with its environment: if an animal is having difficulty in coping with its environment, or is failing to cope, then its welfare may be regarded as poor. This judgment is distinct from any ethical or moral judgments about the way in which the animal is being treated. 46 Except in relation to deer, little scientific work has been done to assess the impact of hunting on the welfare of the four quarry species. Because it is not possible to ask an animal about its welfare, or to know what is going on inside its head, it is necessary to draw up some indicators which enable one to make a judgment. The precise nature of these indicators will vary depending on the animal concerned but they will usually comprise a mixture of physiological indicators and behavioural indicators. But, because they are only indicators, there is often room for argument about the extent to which a particular finding indicates poor welfare as opposed to, for example, exertion that can be regarded as falling within natural limits. It is also necessary to consider whether the assessment of welfare should be on an absolute or comparative basis. 47 Animal welfare is concerned with the welfare of the individual animal, not the management of the wider population. In assessing the impact of hunting on animal welfare we are persuaded that it is necessary to look at it on a relative, rather than an absolute, basis. It should not be compared with only the best, or the worst, of the alternatives. Nor is it right to justify hunting by reference to the welfare implications of illegal methods of control. (Paragraph 6.12) 48 In the event of a ban on hunting, it seems probable that farmers and others would resort more frequently to other methods to kill foxes, deer, hares and perhaps mink. There would be a mixture of motives: pest control; the value of the carcass; and the recreational value to be derived from shooting. It follows that the welfare of animals which are hunted should be compared with the welfare which, on a realistic assessment, would be likely to result from the legal methods used by farmers and others to manage the population of these animals in the event of a ban on hunting.(Paragraph 6.13) Deer 49 The hunting of a red deer typically comprises a series of intermittent flights in which the deer exerts itself maximally in order to escape from the hounds. An average hunt which ends in the killing of the deer lasts about 3 hours. Scientific studies show that, at the end of a chase, deer have very low levels of carbohydrate (glycogen) in their muscles and that this largely explains why they are forced to stop. 50 There is a lack of firm information about the wounding rates which arise from stalking/shooting deer. Comparing the welfare implications of hunting and stalking/ shooting deer is a complex matter, requiring the balancing of the welfare of all the deer that are hunted against the welfare of the numbers of shot deer which are wounded. 51 Although there are still substantial areas of disagreement, there is now a better understanding of the physiological changes which occur when a deer is hunted. Most scientists agree that deer are likely to suffer in the final stages of hunting. The available evidence does not enable us to resolve the disagreement about the point at which, during the hunt, the welfare of the deer becomes seriously compromised. There is also a lack of firm information about what happens to deer which escape, although the available research suggests that they are likely to recover. (Paragraph 6.33) 52 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. (Paragraph 6.39) 53 A great deal depends, however, on the skill and care taken by the stalker. It is unfortunate that there is no reliable information on wounding rates, even in Scotland where stalking is carried out extensively. In the event of a ban on hunting, there is a risk that a greater number of deer than at present would be shot by less skilful shooters, in which case wounding rates would increase. Consideration should be given to requiring all stalkers to prove their competence by demonstrating that they had undertaken appropriate training. (Paragraph 6.40) Foxes 54 The three main aspects of foxhunting which give rise to concern on welfare grounds are: the chase; the "kill" by the hounds above ground; and digging-out/terrierwork. 55 There is a lack of scientific evidence about the welfare implications of hunting, although some post mortem reports have been received. The welfare implications of hunting need to be compared with those which arise from other methods such as shooting, and snaring. 56 The evidence which we have seen suggests that, in the case of the killing of a fox by hounds above ground, death is not always effected by a single bite to the neck or shoulders by the leading hound resulting in the dislocation of the cervical vertebrae. In a proportion of cases it results from massive injuries to the chest and vital organs, although insensibility and death will normally follow within a matter of seconds once the fox is caught. There is a lack of firm scientific evidence about the effect on the welfare of a fox of being closely pursued, caught and killed above ground by hounds. We are satisfied, nevertheless, that this experience seriously compromises the welfare of the fox. (Paragraph 6.49) 57 Although there is no firm scientific evidence, we are satisfied that the activity of digging out and shooting a fox involves a serious compromise of its welfare, bearing in mind the often protracted nature of the process and the fact that the fox is prevented from escaping. (Paragraph 6.52) 58 It is likely that, in the event of a ban on hunting, many farmers and landowners would resort to a greater degree than at present to other methods to control the numbers of foxes. We cannot say if this would lead to more, or fewer, foxes being killed than at present. (Paragraph 6.58) 59 None of the legal methods of fox control is without difficulty from an animal welfare perspective. Both snaring and shooting can have serious adverse welfare implications. (Paragraph 6.59) 60 Our tentative conclusion is that lamping using rifles, if carried out properly and in appropriate circumstances, has fewer adverse welfare implications than hunting, including digging-out. However, in areas where lamping is not feasible or safe, there would be a greater use of other methods. We are less confident that the use of shotguns, particularly in daylight, is preferable to hunting from a welfare perspective. We consider that the use of snaring is a particular cause for concern. (Paragraph 6.60) 61 In practice, it is likely that some mixture of all of these methods would be used. In the event of a ban on hunting, it is possible that the welfare of foxes in upland areas could be affected adversely, unless dogs could be used, at least to flush foxes from cover. (Paragraph 6.61) Hares 62 There are two areas of welfare concern in respect of hare hunting and coursing: the chase and the "kill". Although no scientific studies have been carried out, there is evidence that, in the case of coursing, there can be a significant delay before a hare which has been caught by the dogs is dispatched. 63 There is a lack of firm scientific evidence about the effect on the welfare of a hare of being closely pursued, caught and killed by hounds during hunting. We are satisfied, nevertheless, that although death and insensibility will normally follow within a matter of seconds, this experience seriously compromises the welfare of the hare. (Paragraph 6.67) 64 We are similarly satisfied that being pursued, caught and killed by dogs during coursing seriously compromises the welfare of the hare. It is clear, moreover, that, if the dog or dogs catch the hare, they do not always kill it quickly. There can also sometimes be a significant delay, in "driven" coursing, before the "picker up" reaches the hare and dispatches it (if it is not already dead). In the case of "walked up" coursing, the delay is likely to be even longer. (Paragraph 6.68) 65 In the event of a ban on hunting and coursing hares, it seems likely that a few more would be shot than at present. There are concerns about the welfare implications of shooting hares because of wounding rates. (Paragraph 6.69) Mink 66 There have been no scientific studies of the welfare implications of hunting in relation to mink. 67 There is a lack of firm scientific evidence about the welfare implications of hunting mink. There seems reason to suppose, however, that being closely pursued, caught and killed by hounds, or being dug out or bolted, seriously compromises the welfare of the mink. The kill, by the hounds or by shooting, is normally quick once the mink is caught. In the absence of hunting, more mink would probably be killed by shooting and, mainly, trapping. These methods involve welfare implications but we do not have sufficient evidence to conclude how they compare with those raised by hunting. (Paragraph 6.71) The welfare of other animals incidentally affected by hunting 68 Concerns have been expressed about the welfare of wildlife incidentally affected by hunting and of farm animals and pets. 69 There is some evidence that hunting incidentally affects the welfare of wildlife. In particular, we have been informed about the stopping-up of badger setts and a few isolated cases of disturbance to otter — both of which are protected species - and wildfowl during mink hunting. The frequency of such incidents is disputed.(Paragraph 6.75) 70 The welfare of pets which are attacked by hounds is clearly compromised, and their owners often suffer great distress. (Paragraph 6.76) The welfare of the hounds and horses 71 Concerns have been expressed about the welfare of hounds and the horses involved in hunting. These have tended to focus on injuries or deaths of hounds on roads or railway lines; injuries to terriers during terrierwork; and the common practice of putting hounds down at the end of their working lives. In relation to horses, concerns are sometimes expressed about the injuries received during hunting. 72 We have received evidence of injuries to terriers during terrierwork. This clearly involves some compromise of the terrier’s welfare when it occurs. (Paragraph 6.84) 73 We have received no evidence that hunting, in general, raises greater concerns about the welfare of the horses and dogs involved than other activities such as horse racing or greyhound racing, except for small number of deaths or injuries to hounds which result from straying on roads or railways lines. There are other concerns about the hunts’ practice in putting down hounds which are considered too old to hunt and about the numbers of hounds which might be put down in the event of a ban. Similarly, there are concerns over the fate of surplus horses if hunting were to be banned, and of retired racehorses. Strictly speaking, these matters do not raise animal welfare concerns provided that the hounds and horses are destroyed humanely. Rather, they raise ethical issues, which are outside our terms of reference. But any need to put down hounds or horses, in the event of a ban, could be minimised if there was a suitable lead-in time before it was implemented. (Paragraph 6.85)
Chapter 7 74 The hunts argue that hunting has played, and continues to play, an important role in creating, managing and conserving habitat which is valuable for plant and animal life. 75 Hunts are involved in activities such as managing woodland, scrub and hedgerows, as well as helping to carry out censuses of deer and hares. A judgement about the importance of these activities needs to be made in the context of major changes in agricultural land use and practice, the introduction of agri-environment schemes and any evidence of negative impacts arising from such matters as the disturbance caused to habitat and wildlife by hunting. 76 It is difficult to distinguish the effect that hunting has had on influencing land management practices from the broader impact of game management for shooting. Foxhunting has undoubtedly had a beneficial influence in lowland parts of England in conserving and promoting habitat which has helped biodiversity, although any effect has been in specific localities. In the case of hare hunting and coursing, it seems clear that those interested in these activities have helped to maintain habitats which are favourable to the hare and to a number of other species. (Paragraph 7.32) 77 Hunting has clearly played a very significant role in the past in the formation of the rural landscape and in the creation and management of areas of nature conservation. Nowadays, however, hunting with dogs is likely to form only a relatively minor factor in determining farmers' and landowners' land management practices. It still plays a role, though, in certain localities in respect of woodland planting and management. (Paragraph 7.42) 78 Hunting exerts much less influence than agricultural market and policy trends, the management of game for shooting or incentives under agri-environment schemes. With the possible exception of hare conservation, a ban on hunting with dogs would be unlikely to have a major impact from a conservation perspective. In the case of the hare, on those estates which favour hare coursing or hunting, rather than shooting, a ban might lead farmers and landowners to pay less attention to encouraging hare numbers. The loss of habitat suitable for hares could have serious consequences for a number of birds and other animals. (Paragraph 7.43) Chapter 8 79 Drag and bloodhound hunting involve following a man-made trail, either an artificial scent or the scent of a human being. It is frequently argued that they could provide a very satisfactory replacement for live quarry hunting, enabling hunters, followers, hounds and horses to switch from one activity to the other. 80 The research which we commissioned, and the evidence which we heard, indicates that the picture is more complicated than this. There are potential difficulties over such matters as the availability of suitable land, the relative "predictability" of these sports compared with live quarry hunting, the lack of attraction for non-mounted followers, the problems in producing interesting "houndwork" and the fact that they tend to appeal most at present to those who want concentrated riding and jumping. 81 Drag and bloodhound hunting are different from live quarry hunting. In particular, they involve the laying of a man-made trail. They lack the unpredictability and, consequently, some of the interest associated with a live quarry. The hound work, especially in the case of the draghounds, is less subtle and complex. (Paragraph 8.44) 82 There would be greater incentive, in the event of a ban, to expand the number of drag and bloodhound packs and the level of participation in both sports. Because bloodhounds are in short supply, and are not easy to breed, any growth in the short term would mainly come from using foxhounds for draghunting. The scope for expansion is impossible to predict with any accuracy at present because the existence of hunting as a complementary activity means that there has been little motivation in practice to develop the sports. The popularity of horse riding, however, suggests that greater efforts would be made to develop substitute activities in the event of a ban on hunting. The kinds of opportunities that drag and bloodhound hunting already offer in some areas might be expanded. There is some scope for adjusting the level of skill required in drag and bloodhound hunting to riders of different ability levels. There is also possible scope for developing other forms of cross country riding, possibly on a fee-paying basis. (Paragraph 8.45) 83 Some of the evidence we received suggested that there would be considerable reluctance on the part of farmers to make available sufficient, suitable contiguous land and that this could considerably limit the growth of these sports. It is questionable whether the possibility of making payments to farmers would overcome these difficulties. A payment system would not be easy to devise and operate and would be likely to increase significantly participants' costs. (Paragraph 8.46) 84 A few of those who presently take part in live quarry hunting already go drag or bloodhound hunting as well. In the event of a ban, some more would take up one or other of these sports. And, no doubt, if more diverse types of draghunting were developed, some new recruits would come from those who do not presently hunt live quarry. But others would either not give these sports a try or would not persevere with them. In particular, they offer little attraction to non-mounted participants and followers. Evidence from elsewhere, in particular Germany, suggests that draghunting and bloodhound hunting would not change materially or experience a major upsurge in popularity. Instead it would be simply one - and not necessarily the most important - of a number of equestrian activities to which participants in mounted hunting might turn in the event of a ban. (Paragraph 8.47) 85 In the event of a ban on live hare coursing, drag coursing might have some appeal, especially to those owners of greyhounds who are essentially interested in racing their dogs. It would have less appeal for those people who particularly enjoy the contest between the hare and the dog. (Paragraph 8.52) 86 It is unlikely that either drag and bloodhound hunting or drag coursing would of themselves mitigate to any substantial extent any adverse effects on the rural economy or the social life of the countryside arising from a ban on hunting.(Paragraph 8.53) Chapter 9 87 There are a number of aspects of the way that hunting is carried out which give rise to particular concern. (Paragraph 9.2) Trespass, disruption and disturbance 88 There are complaints of trespass, disruption and disturbance by the hunts. These include trespass on roads and railway lines, invasion of people's property and blocking of roads and lanes. There is also concern about the way in which hunts sometimes deal with complaints. 89 There are too many cases of trespass, disruption and disturbance. These are most common where hunts operate too close to residential areas and interfere with the movement of traffic on roads. We do not want to exaggerate these problems but they can cause distress to the individuals and families involved. To some extent hunts could avoid these problems themselves, by being more selective about the areas in which they hunt. This would be likely to lead to fewer hunts. Steps that might be taken, in the absence of a ban, include: restricting hunting in certain parts of hunts' countries; reducing or amalgamating the number of hunts; requiring permission to be obtained in writing on a regular basis from farmers and landowners; penalising trespass, or repeated trespass, over land where permission has not been given; and improving means of seeking and obtaining redress. (Paragraph 9.8) Openness 90 Concerns about hunting are exacerbated by a sense that it is not really open to public scrutiny. 91 In the absence of a ban, organised hunting should be conducted on a more open basis than at present in order to provide greater reassurance that approved procedures are being followed. One possible option would be the appointment of individuals as independent monitors who would have the freedom to take photographs and video evidence. Their task would be to observe organised hunting and to take up with the hunt, and others as necessary, any concerns that they might have about the way in which it is being conducted. They might also serve as a channel for complaints by others. It would no doubt be helpful if monitors were appointed by a reputable, independent body. (Paragraph 9.10) Autumn/cub hunting 92 Autumn/cub hunting takes place in the late summer/early autumn. It is argued that it is important in reducing the numbers of foxes; that it disperses the young foxes; and that it serves to train young hounds. These arguments are not wholly persuasive. Moreover, the practice of "holding up" (i.e. driving foxes back into the wood or coppice) causes concern. 93 In the absence of a ban, consideration could be given to a number of options for responding to the concerns about autumn/cub hunting. These options include: prohibiting the practice entirely; introducing a closed season for hunting foxes, so that hunting would start at a later date than it does at present; permitting it only in those areas where it was clearly necessary as a means of controlling fox numbers; and prohibiting the practice of "holding up". (Paragraph 9.16) Digging-out and bolting/Terrierwork 94 There is concern about terrierwork. It is felt that a fox, once it has gone to ground, should not be dug out. There are also reports of injuries caused in fights between terriers and foxes underground. On the other hand, it is argued that terrierwork is important in controlling fox numbers, especially in upland sheep-rearing and game management areas. 95 Digging-out and bolting foxes is a complex issue because of the perceived needs in different parts of England and Wales. In the absence of a ban, serious consideration could be given as to whether this practice should be allowed to continue and, if so, under what conditions. Possible options would be to ban it altogether; confine it to those areas where it is considered necessary as a means of controlling fox numbers or in the interests of animal welfare; make the practice subject to the general legislation on cruelty by removing the present exemptions for hunting; or improve monitoring by the hunts and by any independent monitors.(Paragraph 9.20) Stopping-up 96 There are complaints that hunts are not complying with the legal requirements governing the way in which they may stop up badger setts. Some people also object to the stopping up of foxes' earths. 97 There have been many suggestions put to us that, at times, hunts and others contravene the law relating to the stopping-up of badger setts. One option, in the absence of a ban on hunting, would be to remove the present exemption for hunts. In the case of stopping-up of foxes' earths, there are a number of possible options which could be considered in the absence of a ban. These include: prohibiting the practice entirely; confining it to those areas where it is considered necessary in the interests of controlling fox numbers; or otherwise limiting the circumstances in which it may be done or the way in which it can be carried out. (Paragraph 9.24) Use of artificial earths 98 Artificial earths have been used by hunts to provide shelter for foxes and to provide shelter for foxes and to encourage them to live in suitable places. 99 The active use of artificial earths, with a view to hunting, is inconsistent with the stated objective of controlling fox numbers through hunting. In the absence of a ban, hunts could be required, or encouraged, to end this practice. (Paragraph 9.27) Deliberately interfering with the quarry's flight 100 There is concern about deliberate direct interference by people with the quarry's flight. In the absence of a ban, action could be taken to amend, where necessary, the rules of the relevant associations and to ensure that such interference does not take place unless it is in the interests of the safety of the people or animals involved. In particular, provision could be made to ensure that there was no interference with the flight in order to prolong the chase, prevent the quarry escaping or to prevent it entering land where the hunt did not have permission to go.(Paragraph 9.30) A closed season for hares 101 There is no closed season for culling hares. 102 There is understandable concern that the seasons for hare coursing and hunting are too long in relation to the hare's breeding season. In the absence of a ban on hunting, an option would be to introduce a closed season. Consideration would also need to be given to whether a closed season should apply to shooting.(Paragraph 9.33) Hunting hinds with calves 103 Hunting hinds with a calf gives rise to understandable concern. It puts the hind in a position of having to choose between saving itself and staying with the calf. We are not able to say how often this situation occurs but action could be taken to end this practice in the absence of a ban. (Paragraph 9.35) Legislative action 104 In the event of a ban on hunting, the various concerns would be resolved, in principle, subject to any exemptions or exceptions permitted in the legislation. There would be no need, therefore, to consider separate action. In the absence of a ban, one possible legislative approach would be to remove the present exemptions for hunting in the Wild Mammals (Protection) Act 1996. This would be an important signal and give opponents of hunting a clearer opportunity to test their views about cruelty in the courts. In practice, this might have only a limited effect since the activities penalised by that Act have little relevance to hunting.(Paragraph 9.39) Hunting practised outside the registered hunts and coursing clubs 105 A great deal of hunting takes place outside the regulatory framework of the registered hunts and coursing clubs. Consideration would have to be given, in the absence of a ban, to the way in which any changes made should apply to these activities. 106 If action is taken to address any of the concerns about the way hunting is carried out, it would be important to consider whether, and if so how, it could be applied to hunting undertaken by those operating outside the registered hunts and coursing clubs. (Paragraph 9.42) Licensing and regulation 107 Many other countries have licensing systems to cover hunting, governing such matters as the suitability of the applicant and their knowledge of hunting. In the absence of a ban, consideration could be given to establishing such a system here. 108 The fact that hunting (of all kinds) is not subject to some form of licensing contrasts markedly with the position in a number of other countries. (Paragraph 9.52) 109 The existing self-regulation operated by the various hunts and coursing associations has been adapted over the years to deal with emerging concerns and evidence of damage to animal welfare. It will be strengthened by the establishment of the Independent Supervisory Authority for Hunting. None of this regulatory activity applies, however, to hunting carried out by those outside this regulatory framework. It is a reasonable assumption that any adverse impact on animal welfare is greater in the case of the latter than it is with hunting under the auspices of the various self-regulatory bodies. In the absence of a ban, consideration could be given to strengthening the supervision of these forms of hunting. It is for consideration whether, in that event, there would be advantage in establishing some form of licensing system to control all forms of hunting with dogs. (Paragraph 9.53) Further research 110 There are a number of issues which would probably benefit from further research work, if a ban on hunting was not introduced. 111 Consideration could be given, in the absence of a ban on hunting, to commissioning research on a number of topics. (Paragraph 9.56) Chapter 10 Compatibility with the European Convention on Human Rights 112 It has been argued that a ban on hunting would be incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights. The arguments principally centre on whether a ban can be regarded as an interference with "respect for private life" and, if so, whether this is justified under the terms of the Convention; and on whether a ban can be regarded as an interference with property rights and, if so, whether this is justified in the "general interest". 113 Legislation to ban hunting might be open to challenge under Article 1 Protocol I (property rights) and, possibly, Article 8 (respect for private life) of the European Convention on Human Rights. We are not qualified to express an opinion on whether any challenge along these lines would succeed. Key questions would be whether the undoubted interference with property, and possibly with private life, was justified under Convention principles, bearing in mind the nature of the interference and the latitude enjoyed by the national authorities. An important consideration would be whether legislators could point to unnecessary suffering or some other reference point beyond mere disapproval, to reflect the general interest (or, to the extent necessary, the protection of morals and pressing social need). A relevant issue would be the form of the Bill: one which required proof of unnecessary suffering, or some similar test, would be less open to argument than one which banned hunting per se. (Paragraph 10.17) Scope and form 114 In preparing legislation to ban hunting consideration would have to be given to the precise scope of the Bill; the need for exemptions or exceptions; whether the prohibited activities can be defined sufficiently clearly; whether the main offence should be defined closely or be cast in broad terms; what the mental element of the offence should be; the need for secondary offences and enabling powers; and its geographical coverage. 115 Consideration should be given to whether any ban would be manifestly unjust, bearing in mind the activities caught and not caught by it. (Paragraph 10.28) 116 Consideration should be given to whether any ban could be framed sufficiently clearly to enable people to regulate their conduct. A central issue would be whether a Bill would need to have a detailed definition of the prohibited offence and any exceptions or exemptions. (Paragraph 10.29) 117 It would be necessary to consider the form of exceptions that should apply in particular areas, especially sheep-rearing upland areas, and for particular cases, such as the pursuit of injured deer or dealing with orphaned foxes underground or for research purposes. It would be necessary to establish the number and type of dogs that should be permitted for this purpose. (Paragraph 10.30) 118 Unless there was a good reason on objective grounds, we do not think it would be satisfactory to have different legislative provisions in force in different regions of the country. (Paragraph 10.31) Timing 119 There are three options in respect of the implementation of a ban: implementing it at an early fixed date; implementing it at a later fixed date; and providing an order-making power to allow various provisions to be brought into force subsequently. 120 It would be feasible to implement a ban quickly. This would have the advantage of certainty, encouraging those concerned to get on as rapidly as possible with making any necessary adjustments. There are stronger arguments for allowing a reasonable period of adjustment. This would enable more time, for example, to reduce naturally the number of hounds; to develop draghunting and other activities; to put in place new population management strategies; and to mitigate wherever possible any social and economic consequences of a ban. (Paragraph 10.35) 121 A strong objection to a delay in implementing a ban would be that, in the meantime, various practices which opponents of hunting view as particularly objectionable would be allowed to continue. It might be possible to meet some of these objections by taking action in the meantime to ban or curtail some of these activities by considering the options discussed in Chapter 9. (Paragraph 10.36) Enforcement 122 It is argued that the police might have some difficulties in enforcing, and in giving sufficient priority to, a ban on hunting. 123 Legislation implementing a ban might well pose some enforcement difficulties for the police. These matters should be considered by Parliament when examining a Bill. (Paragraph 10.41) Controls on hunting 124 There are various matters relating to other methods of control which might be considered in the event of a ban on hunting. 125 In the event of a ban on hunting, consideration should be given to the training of stalkers, the use of snares and the possible case for a closed season for culling hares. (Paragraph 10.46) Other population management measures 126 Other than in relation to hares, there are no arrangements for monitoring or managing mammal populations. 127 Consideration should be given to the possibility of developing arrangements for monitoring and managing the populations of the four quarry species and other mammals. A ban on hunting would make it necessary to review the existing arrangements for managing deer in the Devon and Somerset area in order to ensure that an effective strategic management system is in place. (Paragraph 10.49) Encouraging other activities 128 The extent to which drag and bloodhound hunting would be taken up, in the event of a ban, would depend on its appeal in comparison with other leisure activities. The Jockey Club and others would no doubt consider the future of point-to-pointing. No central government action would seem to be necessary. 129 In the event of a ban on hunting, there is no specific action which central government should take to promote other activities such as drag or bloodhound hunting. (Paragraph 10.53) Financial, economic and employment aspects 130 Local action might be needed to deal with the employment and economic consequences of a ban. It would be necessary to consider whether any action was required in respect of the fallen stock service and the destruction of hounds. 131 In the event of a ban on hunting, consideration would need to be given to possible action in respect of the fallen stock service provided by many hunts and to whether there would be a case for compensation if hounds had to be destroyed and hunts had no further use for their kennels. (Paragraph 10.60)
|
||||
