CROWBOROUGH TOWN COUNCIL
Town Clerk: David T Harris
The Town Hall · The Broadway · Crowborough · Easr Sussex TN6
1DA
Telephone 01892 652907 · Fax 01892 669736
Email: crowborough@mistral.co.uk
The Chairman
The Committee of Inquiry into Hunting with Dogs
P.O. Box 31010
London
SW1H 9ZL
18th February 2000
Our Ref: 99/CTC/439/ENV/392/GN/DH
Dear Sir/Madam
Please find enclosed herewith this Authority's statement in response to the impact of hunting with dogs in England and Wales for your attention.
Yours faithfully
D.T. Harris
Clerk to the Council
Twin Towns: Montargis (France) . Horwich(Lancashire)
CROWBOROUGH TOWN COUNCIL
STATEMENT IN RESPONSE TO:
COMMITTEE OF INQUIRY
into
THE IMPACT OF HUNTING WITH DOGS
in
ENGLAND AND WALES
Crowborough Town Council in East Sussex voted overwhelmingly to oppose foxhunting in neighbouring Ashdown Forest on 3rd October 1999. The Forest comprises 6,500 acres of publicly owned land. The text of a press release which was issued at that time explains fully the Town Council's concern that the continuance of foxhunting in this area seriously interferes with the function of local democracy and accountability. It is included in response to Questions 9 and 10.
1. Members of the council have not been asked for their opinions on this matter.
2. As above. It is, however, fair to say that hunting with dogs is of no value to the commercial ife of Crowborough.
3. There would be no effect on this town's economy if hunting was banned.
4. The council is not qualified to comment on this question.
5. The council is unaware of any local need to control the populations of foxes, deer ares and mink. No concerns have been brought to its attention.
6. The council is not qualified to comment on this question.
7. As above.
8. As above.
9. Hunting with dogs is not known to contribute to the social and cultural life of this town. (Estimated population 19,700.)
The two foxhunts which use Ashdown Forest are not based in this area. They are the Southdown, Eridge & West Kent and the Old Surrey and Burstow. Presumably their social and cultural activities occur elsewhere.
The fact that these two hunts are permitted to operate immediately around the perimeter of the town and, in particular, upon Ashdown Forest is a matter for concern in the exercise of local democracy.
Crowtc: page 1
9. contd.
On 3rd October t999 the Town Council issued the following statement :
Crowborough Town Council in East Sussex has voted overwhelmingly to oppose foxhunting in nearby Ashdown Forest.
The Forest was bought from Earl De La Warr in 1988 by East Sussex County Council and is managed by a Board of sixteen Conservators, nine of whom are appointed by the County Council, two by the District Council and remaining five are Commoners of the Forest.
The County Council expressed opposition to bloodsports on its lands in 1982 and reiterated this again in April 1998. In addition a Forest byelaw states that 'A person shall not cause any dog belonging to him or in his charge to be upon the Forest or remain upon the Forest unless such dog be and continue to be under proper control and be effectively restrained from causing annoyance to any person and from worrying or disturbing any animal.'
Despite the foregoing, information has emerged recently that foxhunnug is permitted on AsAdown Forest with the consent of the Conservator$ Attention has been focused on the total lack of accountability enjoyed by this group. The nine County Council appointees owe no duty of responsibility to their parent council nor to the electorate: several of them are ex-councillors who failed to regain off ce in local elections in 1997.
The continuance of foxhunting in conflict with the policy of the County Council as landowner and the democratic unaccountability of the County Council's appointees has been recorded in the following resolution :
Crowborough Town Council considers that there is no place in civilised society for the unreasonable and inhumane Practice of hunting foxes with dogs.
It calls upon the nine Conservators of Ashdown Forest who have been appointed by East Sussex County Council to demonstrate proper and democratic accountability in implementing the County Council's policy with regard to banning the Practice of bloodsports on land it holds in trust for the people of East Sussex.
No action has been taken either by the Board of Conservators or by East Sussex County Council to remedy the above.
It is understood that the Board has received legal advice that the status quo should be maintained unless or until the results of a public consultation have been realised. The County Council and Board of Conservators both state that they have insufficient funds to embark on such consultation.
Minutes of the Finance & General Purposes Committee o'- the Board of Conservators held on 7th June 1999 state that (Item 2.) ' The Superintendent presented the Board 's accounts............................... he pointed out that instead of the forecast overspend the accounts showed an underspend of £40,000. '
This would seem to contradict the Conservators assertion that they have had insufficient funds to conduct public consultation on the question of hunting in the Forest.
crowtc: page 2
Question 9. contd.
Additionally, where the County Council's denial of its ability to fund a public consultation on behalf of the Conservators is concerned :
Ashdown Forest Act 1974, 16 c.xxi, Payments by County Council, 25 - (4) states that
' If the amount paid in respect of any year commencing on or after the appointed day by the County Council to the Conservators pursuant to subsection (3) of this section exceeds the amount payable by the County Council in respect of that year pursuant to section 24 (County Council to meet expenses of Conservators) of this Act the amount of such excess shall be carried forward by the Conservators in their accounts to the credit of the County Council and shall be deducted from the amount due by the County Council in respect of the next year in respect of which a sum payable by the County Council to the Conservators pursuant to this Act.
It would seem that the County Council is obliged in law to meet any expenditure incurred by the Conservators, deducting excess from the ensuing year's budget. In a letter from the County Secretary's office dated 10th June 1999 he confirmed that :
So far as the expense of a public consultation is concerned, has a formal request been received by the Conservators to this effect? Yes.
Has such a request been accompanied by any recommendation from the County Council appointed Conservators? No.
Thus the interests of those who participate in or support foxhunting on Ashdown Forest continue to be upheld, against the policy of the County Council; further compromising the actions of councillors acting as appointees to the Board of Conservators and gravely damaging democratic accountability in local government in this area.
l0. As above.
11. The hunts are permitted to operate on the Forest in winter, occasionally in conditions in which other recreational riders have been forbidden to use the land.
The Forest is designated as an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, a Site of Special Scientific Interest and a Special Protection Area.
As the hunts do not keep exclusively to bridleways it is likely that their activities are detrimental to flora and fauna.
12. We feel that this is a matter for professional opinion to predict.
Crowborough Town Council does not wish to submit observations on matters of animal welfare (Questions 13 and 14) or the manner of implementing a ban (Questions 15 to 17.) It relies upon those with experience and appropriate qualifications to contribute their knowledge and bring about necessary reforms.
crowtc: page 3
Date uploaded to site 11 May 2000