Want to write to your MP about bill to bring back fox hunting next Thursday?

First topic message reminder :

Cameron slipping in Bill to bring back hunting with dogs next Thursday, at this stage just to let them flush out the fox so that hunters can shoot them. At the moment this is already allowed providing only two dogs are used, so why would you need a pack? Like we don't know.

Link to write to your MP:



https://www.writetothem.com/

Why do hunters pretend that they're doing everyone a favour by chasing a wild animal and letting a pack of dogs loose on it? Half the time they say they don't catch a fox anyway, so it's not very efficient obviously.

In any case, I'd like to see the excuses when they try to bring back stag hunting and hare coursing.

Obviously different solutions for different circumstances.


I've already said I understand the need to sometimes shoot a troublesome fox.

Raggamuffin wrote:Why do hunters pretend that they're doing everyone a favour by chasing a wild animal and letting a pack of dogs loose on it? Half the time they say they don't catch a fox anyway, so it's not very efficient obviously.

In any case, I'd like to see the excuses when they try to bring back stag hunting and hare coursing.

none of which are acceptable IMO

I have shot a cull deer and one causing substantial damage in young forestry both of which were A)necessary and B) tasty

I donr shoot hares....cause there are only a very few around here....

BUT, in anycase ragga you are a veggie so your deviant and unnatural behaviour and psychology preclude you from having an opinion

(THAT opinion borrowed from tommy monk)

What out Victor

sassy wrote:Cameron slipping in Bill to bring back hunting with dogs next Thursday, at this stage just to let them flush out the fox so that hunters can shoot them.   At the moment this is already allowed providing only two dogs are used, so why would you need a pack?   Like we don't know.

Link to write to your MP:



https://www.writetothem.com/

exceptin scotland where they can use asmany as they like. I wonder why the SNP are so dead set on stopping the rest of the UK have the same hunting as them?

The Devil, You Know wrote:

sassy wrote:Cameron slipping in Bill to bring back hunting with dogs next Thursday, at this stage just to let them flush out the fox so that hunters can shoot them.   At the moment this is already allowed providing only two dogs are used, so why would you need a pack?   Like we don't know.

Link to write to your MP:



https://www.writetothem.com/

exceptin scotland where they can use asmany as they like. I wonder why the SNP are so dead set on stopping the rest of the UK have the same hunting as them?

NEARLY half of Scotland’s registered hunting packs may be breaking the law banning fox hunting, according to animal rights campaigners.

Horseback hunting of foxes with dogs was outlawed north of the border 13 years ago, but hunters are able to exploit a loophole in the law that permits hounds to drive a fox from cover so it can be shot by waiting marksmen.



Now, however, video footage filmed by the League Against Cruel Sports (LACS) during the last hunt season seems to show hunters out with full packs of hounds but no guns in sight.

The clips suggest hunts are routinely using dogs to pursue foxes and not “flushing to guns”, which is permitted under the Protection of Wild Mammals (Scotland) Act 2002.

There are 11 registered hunting packs in Scotland. The campaigners fear many of them could be operating “business as usual” as though the ban never happened.

LACS investigators say they could see no shotguns during surveillance of five Scottish hunts on 16 separate outings between December 2014 and March this year.

Robbie Marsland, director of League Against Cruel Sports Scotland, said: “Our footage suggests at least half the hunts in Scotland are flouting the law with impunity and are operating as if the ban doesn’t apply to them.

“While the hunts we observed claimed to be ‘flushing to guns’ our investigators did not see a single shotgun either used or even brandished.”

The act, which carries penalties of heavy fines or a six-month prison sentence, states that a person who deliberately hunts a wild mammal with a dog is committing an offence.

The exemption allows dogs “under control” to be used “to stalk a wild mammal, or flush it from cover (including an enclosed space within rocks, or other secure cover) above ground … but only if that person acts to ensure that, once the target wild mammal is found or emerges from cover, it is shot, or killed by a bird of prey, once it is safe to do so”.

The campaigners, who are taking the footage to MSPs at Holyrood, are calling for changes to the legislation that will ensure an end to the bloodsport.

They want the number of hounds permitted in hunts restricted to two, as is the case south of the border, and the addition of a clause outlawing reckless behaviour that can result in foxes being killed by dogs “unintentionally”.

“Scotland led the way on legislating to ban hunting with dogs in the British Isles,” Mr Marsland said.

“We are calling on the Scottish Government to lead the way once more and make two simple amendments to the law.

These changes would make it extremely difficult for Scottish hunts to use cynical subterfuge to mask packs of hounds being encouraged to chase foxes and eventually kill them.
http://www.scotsman.com/news/environment/scottish-packs-accused-of-flouting-fox-hunting-ban-1-3783782



So in actual fact using packs of dogs is illegal in Scotland but a loop hole alowes hunts to flout the law

And there is a movement in Scotland to close the cynical "loop hole"

i hope that clears it up for you

Protection of Wild Mammals (Scotland) Act 2002


(1)A person who deliberately hunts a wild mammal with a dog commits an offence.

(2)It is an offence for an owner or occupier of land knowingly to permit another person to enter or use it to commit an offence under subsection (1).

(3)It is an offence for an owner of, or person having responsibility for, a dog knowingly to permit another person to use it to commit an offence under subsection (1).

2 Exception: stalking and flushing from cover

(1)A person who is, or who has the permission of, the owner or lawful occupier of the land on which the stalking, searching or flushing referred to in this subsection takes place does not commit an offence under section 1(1) by using a dog under control to stalk a wild mammal, or flush it from cover (including an enclosed space within rocks, or other secure cover) above ground for the purpose of—

(a)protecting livestock, ground-nesting birds, timber, fowl (including wild fowl), game birds or crops from attack by wild mammals;

(b)providing food for consumption by a living creature, including a person;

(c)protecting human health;

(d)preventing the spread of disease;

(e)controlling the number of a pest species; or

(f)controlling the number of a particular species to safeguard the welfare of that species,

but only if that person acts to ensure that, once the target wild mammal is found or emerges from cover, it is shot, or killed by a bird of prey, once it is safe to do so.

(2)Where a person is using a dog in connection with the despatch of a wild mammal, being of a pest species, with the intention of flushing the wild mammal from cover or from below ground in order that it may be shot or killed by lawful means, that person does not commit an offence under section 1(1) by virtue of the dog killing that wild mammal in the course of that activity.

(3)A person does not commit an offence under section 1(1) by using a dog under control to flush a fox or mink from below ground or by using a dog under control to flush a fox from an enclosed space within rocks or other secure cover above ground, but only if that person—

(a)does so for one or more of the purposes specified in paragraphs (a) to (f) of subsection (1);

(b)takes reasonable steps to ensure that the fox or mink is flushed as soon as reasonably possible after it is located and shot as soon as possible after it is flushed;

(c)takes all reasonable steps to prevent injury to the dog including steps to prevent the dog becoming trapped underground and, if it does become trapped underground, steps to ensure it is rescued as soon as is practicable;

(d)is in possession of a firearm for which the person holds a valid firearms or shotgun certificate; and

(e)either—

(i)is the owner or lawful occupier of the land on which the activity takes place; or

(ii)has the permission of the owner or lawful occupier of that land to undertake that activity.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2002/6/introduction

Raggamuffin wrote:Why do hunters pretend that they're doing everyone a favour by chasing a wild animal and letting a pack of dogs loose on it? Half the time they say they don't catch a fox anyway, so it's not very efficient obviously.

In any case, I'd like to see the excuses when they try to bring back stag hunting and hare coursing.

That will be next  on Cameron's  agenda.
Doesn't  his tax evading  father in law own stag hunting land in Jura,Scotland?
"The stag hunting reprieve is for you,papa".

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/11619189/David-Camerons-father-in-law-offers-to-adopt-a-Rob-Roy-style-Scottish-accent-to-stop-Mugabe-style-landgrab-by-SNP.html