Do you agree with this?


Sunday Telegraph
London, UK
Last Updated: 11:49pm GMT 16/02/2008

When the hunting law was introduced, it was feared or feted as the end of a country sport. Now, three years later, it appears to have left the pursuit's opponents deeply wounded, while hunting goes from strength to strength.

Figures released by the Countryside Alliance (CA) ahead of the Act's third anniversary tomorrow show that protester numbers have fallen to just 678 this season, with only three weekends still to run.

Over the same period, the hunts themselves have enjoyed a remarkable renaissance, with record numbers of people taking part.

With anti-hunt activists also admitting that they are facing problems recruiting people, the news will strengthen calls for the Act to be repealed and will also embarrass the Government.

Tim Bonner, from the CA, said: "The anti movement has run out of steam. This shows up the myth that there is a vast anti-hunting movement. Instead, there is only a tiny and dwindling number of hardcore activists left who will never be won over."

This season has so far seen 84 hunts targeted by a total of 678 protesters. During the 2003-04 season - the last before the Act was introduced - there were 196 hunts and 1,924 protesters.

In the years leading up to the ban, groups of saboteurs numbering in the hundreds were common.

More than 500 protesters threw eggs and other missiles at the Essex Farmers and Union meet at Maldon on Boxing Day in 2000.

In one particularly brutal encounter in 1997, 120 saboteurs attacked the Hursley Hambledon Hunt near Warnford in Hampshire, wielding baseball bats and smashing car windscreens. Three hunt supporters needed hospital treatment while 44 protesters were arrested.

Lee Moon, from the Hunt Saboteurs Association, would not reveal exactly how many members his organisation had, but admitted: "There has been a drop-off.

"We know the hunts are killing foxes against the law, week in, week out. But when we try and recruit new members, the public's perception is that fox hunting has been banned. We face a struggle to get the message out there."

Meanwhile, the League Against Cruel Sports, which spearheaded the introduction of the Hunting Act, is selling its £1.2?million offices in central London and seeking cheaper premises.

However, Barry Hugill, its spokesman, said: "The league is not as active as before the ban, but if there was an attempt to repeal it, money would flood in and people would sign up. Our support is dormant."

Mr Hugill was unable to say exactly how many members the League had, but stated it was between 5,000 and 10,000. In the 1990s, it had 18,000.

When the Act came into force in February 2005, supporters and opponents of the legislation were united in the belief that it would kill off the sport. In fact, it has been given a new lease of life, with 68,000 followers hunting by using various exemptions under the law.

Many now take part in drag hunts, where riders and hounds pursue a scented rag, or in trail hunts which involve following a scent trail.

It is still permissible to kill foxes if the dogs stumble upon them accidentally, and they can still be driven out of hiding and shot as long as no more than two hounds are involved. Dogs can also be used to flush out a fox so it can be hunted by a bird of prey.

Jim Barrington is a former director of the League Against Cruel Sports who has now changed sides and campaigns for licensed hunting on behalf of the Middle Way Group of MPs.

He said: "The hunt supporters have been pleasantly surprised by the legislation while the antis are realising it hasn't turned out as they expected.

"The league is in a difficult position because it drafted the law, and even though it isn't working, it has to say it is. And that is not a message that is going to encourage people to continue supporting it."

If it is in the Daily Telegraph it is likely to be more true that if it were in Rupert Murdoch's Sun or the Daily Mail.

quote:

Originally posted by Ohiosam:
Do you agree with this?

Firstly, for our North American friends, this is hunting on horseback with hounds so it is a slightly different use of the term than would be common in North America.

From what I can see support for the hunt has increased and the legislation took the momentum from the green vermin and so has lead to reduced support for their attack on this traditional way of life. Of course those people haven't gone away you know and are probably compaigning against shooting, or breathing or something.

There is a huge urban lobby here in the UK who drive out into the countryside and point at random things they want banned. This seems to be their only purpose in life. Unfortunately more times than not they are ultimately successful and they are willing to use the most extreme methods to ensure success. In the hunting debate they painted those hunting as posh, rich toffs and turned the whole thing into a class struggle thereby drawing in other groups with an interest in such things.

So, I think there are both positive and negative messages for us in this. The positive is that people continue to hunt and that more people now turn out to show their support for something the green nutters want removed from society. On the negative side they did manage to get a law passed which nearly put a stop to hunting and so they could do likewise with shooting or fishing which are particular targets. They are lining up target shooting with "research" relating to the introduction of lead into the ground and I know that you folks in the US are facing a similar problem over there. These people never rest and they have a huge budget to support spreading their lies and propaganda. I'm told that Greenpeace alone has spent £2 billion on PR in the last 10 years to promote their man made global warming fantasy story. That sort of cash buys you a lot of politicians and media coverage.

quote:

Originally posted by Ohiosam:
However, Barry Hugill, its spokesman, said: "The league is not as active as before the ban, but if there was an attempt to repeal it, money would flood in and people would sign up. Our support is dormant."

Maybe I am a pessimist, but I do believe repealing the ban would bring back the antis, they will have the oldest British greenie cause celebre to fight against again...

I'm glad the hunt has attracted new members, but it is a shame that it is being conducted like some sort of criminal activity rather than a popular and respectable countryside pursuit.

In general I think the point made by the article is pretty accurate. Support for hunts and hunting is up and support for the League id down. In fact I have read reports where the claim is that the League has less than 2000 members. However the only quote I disagree with in some part is that made by the CA.

quote:

Tim Bonner, from the CA, said: "The anti movement has run out of steam. This shows up the myth that there is a vast anti-hunting movement. Instead, there is only a tiny and dwindling number of hardcore activists left who will never be won over."

Personally I don't think it is the hardore members we need to worry about, more the perception of country sports participants by the general public as a whole. They are the valuable electorate not the small band of idiots with drums. The public at large is misguided in believing that hunting has been banned and so they don't pay attention anymore. I'm not convinced a repeal would be the way forward exactly. As for the antis having run out of steam I think this is wishful thinking. We are facing potential lead bans and controls on rearing and release of game birds. Tighter licencing practices within the same legal framework make legal gun ownership more difficult than ever.

The CA has to sing about its successes as it has done extremey well with this particular cause, but what the article doesn't state is that as a whole we are still fighting the anti's on many other fronts.

Rgds,
FB

The League also scored a bit of an "own goal" (for our American friends it means scoring for the opposition) when one it's deer managers was filmed despatching a still live stag with a knife on a LACS deer reserve. They were already in trouble for shooting deer on their reserves from a vehicle which is illegal - again this was filmed. Deer on their over populated reserves are generally felt to be in very poor condition and the incidence of TB is high.

None of this helps their cause.

Thanks for the replies. I can't imagine the crap you guys have to go through to enjoy the activities I take for granted. I hope the article is accurate and you English sportsmen continue to grow in numbers and influence.

But on the other hand Ohiosman....the things you take for granted that we don't:
No tags on deer, no restrictions on how many to take.
Multiple deer species available which makes year-round hunting just about doable if you want to (and have access).

I also still enjoy hunting with hounds.

Bird shooting...we can shoot the hens too!

The Uk is not the repressed place that a lot of our US cousins seem to think. I'm not saying it is perfect, there are certainly things that could be better, or that need to be protected from antis....but it is not so bad.

UKHunter makes a very good point, in lots of ways we still have a hold on our 1,000 year old (approx!) game management heritage. I for one am not envious of our North American friends as their way of managing hunting would not suit our country, what I regret is that we seem to have lost a great deal of our hunting culture which in continental Europe they seem to have retained more or less. This made job of the anti-everything mob very much easier. However, sooting sports have a much better narative to relate and we do not have a serious political party in this country that wishes to ban shooting, but on the other hand there is scant support for it, so things are in the balance! I'll stop now before I get removed to the poitical forum!