Devon and Somerset Association for Deer Protection

This Association was formed early in 1988 of local people living primarily in West Somerset and adjacent areas who wished to oppose the hunting of deer with hounds. The catalyst that galvanised people into taking this action was when a deer being chased by the Devon & Somerset Staghounds on 10th October 1987 took refuge on the roof of a cottage in the hamlet of Hawkcombe, just outside the village of Porlock, Somerset. A photograph of this incident gained nationwide coverage in newspapers and on national television at that time. Subsequently it was used as the cover photograph of our Association's booklet, a copy of which is enclosed, which sets out the views of our Association and quotes incidents recorded over a number of years.

This booklet could now do with updating to report the numerous incidents, many of which have been recorded on video film since 1988, and to cover news reports, letters to the press etc. However, we shall seek to cover much of this updating under the various headings that will follow.

In 1990, as members of the National Trust, I proposed and our Chairman, Diana Wilson, seconded a successful resolution at the Trust's AGM which, after a long struggle which included an even more successful EGM resolution and various reports, resulted in the Trust banning deerhunting on their land. The support indicated by members of the National Trust was translated into many of them joining our Association as associate members from all around the country. The Trust's decision to ban was followed closely by a similar decision by the Forestry Commission in relation to their land on the Quantock Hills and Exmoor.

It has frequently been suggested that opposition to hunting is a political issue. It should perhaps be mentioned therefore that both Diana Wilson and I were, coincidentally, both Conservative Councillors with large authorities, each for twelve years, Diana here on Somerset County Council. Diana Wilson is also Chairman of the national Conservative AntiHunt Council. It will be noted from the list of our Patrons on the inside of the back cover of our booklet that five past and present Conservative MPs are included.

We have, of course, never asked our members for their political affiliations, if any, and suspect they include supporters of all parties or none. Equally, although we are specifically opposed as an Association to deer-hunting, we suspect our members are also opposed to other forms of hunting with hounds.

1. The necessary culling of deer for management purposes. We accept that deer numbers have to be controlled. If uncontrolled, deer numbers in the wild will expand by approximately 25% each year. However, hunting with hounds is both an inefficient and cruel control method. Approximately 1,000 red deer are culled in the region of Exmoor and the Quantock Hills each year. Of these an absolute maximum of 150 red deer are killed by the three hunts, the Devon & Somerset Staghounds, the Quantock Staghounds and the Tiverton Staghounds. Their precise territory is provided on page 1, para 2 of our booklet.

A majority of the 1,000 deer culled each year are taken by the rifle. In this area both the National Trust and the Forestry Commission employ marksmen for this purpose. In this regard we enclose a leaflet provided by West Country Deer Management and a paper issued by the Forestry Commission 'Managing Deer in the Countryside'. Nowhere within either document will anything be found that suggests hunting with hounds as an appropriate culling method. It is simply not mentioned. The maximum of 150 taken by the hunts could easily be absorbed into the 1,000 taken by marksmen.

2. Killing deer (or not, as the case may be) by hunting. We do not propose to enclose videos of the climax of deer hunts as we anticipate that these will be provided by other organisations. Many of these videos (of which we have copies) will speak for themselves. Most relate to the hunting of stags, which we believe to be especially cruel during the autumn rut. At this time stags will spend an enormous amount of energy gathering together a harem of hinds for mating, and will expend time and energy in fighting and defending these groups from being 'abducted' by other equally enthusiastic males. We refer to this on page 7, para 1 of our booklet.

We refer specifically now to hind hunting which takes place from the beginning of November until the end of February. Contrary to the impression that may be given by the hunters, no attempt is made to select an old or infirm hind. The hounds are simply laid on to a group of hinds and it will usually be the hind that breaks away from the main group that will be settled to for hunting. Sometimes the hounds will divide after more than one hind, which will usually have a calf at heel. Because hinds do not have antlers to provide a means of identification, if a hunted hind becomes merged into another group the hunters will not recognise her again, by which time she and her calf will have been split up and unlikely to be reunited. Very bad news for the calf.

Over the years the two main hunts have published reports of their outings in the local press each week. In 1990, just prior to our success with the National Trust resolution, we took particular note of the reports of the Devon & Somerset Staghounds during hind

hunting in November. In the first of these there is reference to the hounds being "on two lines when they (the hounds) probably chose the wrong one"! The next report covered three outings, one when the hounds had to be "stopped off a stag" (when out of season) and referred to the end of the day when "it was almost certainly a fresh hind" the hounds were running. The third report indicated that "there were other deer on foot at once" then the hounds were lost and eventually "picked up hunting on two lines". Then the hounds "joined in with a single hound (who had presumably gone off on his own) running a fresh bunch". Then the fog came down and "most people temporarily lost the hounds" and when later contact was renewed "it was probably a fresh hind" that ended the day! Efficiency? Of seven reported outings no deer were culled; the hounds did the 'selecting' and for much of the time the hunt didn't even know which hind they were chasing. Most hinds by February will be pregnant with a well formed calf.

3. Incidents with the deerhound packs. Four pages of incidents follow between the ten years 1987-1997. These were provided to MPs for the 28th November 1997 Second Reading of Mike Foster MP's Bill.

INCIDENTS WITH LOCAL DEERHOUND PACKS

Oct 10 1987
A hunted stag was chased into the village of Hawkcombe, Porlock and took refuge on a cottage roof. This caused a national outcry and an Early Day Motion was put down in Parliament.

April 1988
The Exmoor Society criticized "the appalling behaviour of some hunt followers" and the damage caused to heathers etc. on land designated as a Site of Special Scientific Interest.

April 1988
A triple pack hunt was held on the Quantocks to round off the season. The Nature Conservancy Council officer was reported in the press as saying "I think it has put the hunts in a most unfortunate public light". The Countryside Officer for Somerset County Council was reported as saying he "regretted the event had taken place" and said the hunts "were trying to play rugby on a billiard table" in terms of the general environmental damage they inflicted.

Sept. 1988
John Hicks, then Sanctuaries Manager for the League Against Cruel Sports, was set upon by hunt supporters as he endeavoured to video the end of a hunt at Horner Water. The following year a private case for assault brought by LACS was successful and four hunt supporters were fined.

1989
The Tiverton Staghounds trespassed on a farm near Barnstaple where the owners had previously indicated that they were not welcome. 1989 A hunt supporter with the Quantock Staghounds trespassed on the grounds of the Combe House Hotel, Holford to chase out a hind that had taken refuge there, the hotel owners having previously indicated that the hunt were not welcome.

1989
A hind hunted by the Quantock Staghounds took refuge in the grounds of Halsway Manor Hotel. Representatives of Clark's Shoes (who were meeting there for a Conference) called in a vet and the RSPCA and would not allow the hunt to kill the hind. (photograph of hind in attached cuttings)

1989
John Hicks recorded on video film a young stag being whipped up by a member of the Quantock Staghounds when it fell on a number of occasions in its flight towards the League Sanctuary near Holford. This took place on National Trust land.

10 Oct 1989
Two years to the day from the incident of 'the stag on the roof' another stag was shot on private property by the Devon & Somerset Staghounds on the village side of the two metre high fence that had been erected by the hunt. A resident who voiced a public protest at the incident had the words "Go Home Scum" sprayed across his workshop door. In fact he was born in Somerset!

Jan 1990
Local residents in Holford accused the Quantock Staghounds of putting lives at risk when they shot a hind in full flight as she attempted to escape into the village. (In 1983 Holford residents voted 96-36 to ban the Quantock Staghounds from their village).

1990
A hunt supporter at Seavington St Mary near Ilminster planted a Molotov cocktail type bomb under his own landrover in an effort to incriminate the anti hunt faction. Subsequently he received a nine month prison sentence. Two other similar offences were taken into account.

March 1990
The Northants Chronicle & Echo reported the death of a muntjac deer that was killed by foxhounds. The huntsman of the Grafton Hunt was reported as describing the incident as "unfortunate and very regrettable, but the hounds cannot always be kept under proper control. It is animal instinct for the hounds to go after deer." Although not a local incident it is included because here we have it from a huntsman "the hounds cannot always be kept under proper control"!

Sept 1990
A case came before West Somerset magistrates after holidaymakers from North Hampshire had their vehicle damaged and were forced backwards down Luccombe Hill by a Range Rover belonging to a member of the Devon & Somerset Staghounds. The Range Rover did not stop, but continued to the meet, leaving the visitor and his hysterical 10 year old daughter to follow in order to challenge the huntsman. The perpetrator was fined £990 for criminal damage, £100 for a false tax disc, £36 for failing to produce his tax insurance and £175 for failing to stop and failing to report an accident.

Nov 1990
A successful members' resolution was passed at the AGM of the National Trust seeking a ban on deerhunting on their land. Despite the Council of the Trust's reluctance to implement the resolution, two national Gallup Polls have indicated 80% and 82% respectively of the public in favour of a ban.

1991
A leading member of the Devon & Somerset Staghounds was fined by West Somerset Magistrates for two offences resulting in causing unnecessary suffering to a horse following an incident the previous year when his horse's leg fell through the rotten floor of the vehicle in which it was being taken to a meet. The offences were for failing to divide the trailer with partitions to secure the 3 horses being transported and for failing to maintain the floor of the vehicle sufficiently well to withstand the weight of the animals.

Jan 1992
A pregnant hind was chased by the Quantock Staghounds over Triscombe Quarry. This prompted the Western Daily Press to hold a 'phone in poll' resulting in 78% of 14,000 callers wishing to see a ban.

Feb 1992
A hind died in Hawkcombe in the stream by the old Milihouse having been chased down the hill by three hounds. The hunt have assiduously avoided giving any explanation following repeated requests asking how this hind met her death when only hounds and no members of the hunt were present. The hind's body was quickly removed from the scene by members of the hunt.

Mar 1992
The Quantock Staghounds again drew massive media publicity when they dragged a cornered deer out of a doctor's porch in the village of Merridge, where it had sought refuge. It was reported that garden furniture and ornaments were smashed as huntsmen struggled with the young stag. One near neighbour was reported as saying "I have lived here all my life and I have seen the stream run red with blood on hunting days. I am sick of the way they carry on. The hunt followers have no respect for anyone". A Council lorry driver received massive public support for backing his lorry across the lane in an effort to stop the hunt from reaching the young stag.

(On 14th February 1992 a vote on Kevin McNamara's Wild Mammals (Protection) Bill was lost by only 12 votes. Result 187-175)

Mar I992
Within a week of the last incident, and only about 3 miles away, another hunt, the West Somerset Vale Foxhounds, invaded a garden at Holford. Four children witnessed a pregnant vixen ripped apart in their front garden as they played and later found three tiny cubs that had spilled onto the path. Their mother appealed for an end to such "barbaric violence".

1993
Early in the year the Masters of Deerhounds Association were criticised for giving official recognition to two new packs of buckhounds in this area which hunt roe deer, our smallest native species. Considerable concern was expressed that hunting continued into June when red deer hinds and roe does would be producing their young and there were fears that they could abort or the calves be trampled or disturbed.

Oct 1994
One of the finest Exmoor stags was filmed being manhandled and almost drowned in the river Barle by members of the Devon & Somerset Staghounds after being mis-shot a number of times before it was finally killed. This incident was regarded as so appalling that the Masters of Deerhounds Assocn. imposed a five week ban on the D & SS.

Spring 1995
A row erupted when the D. & SS outraged villagers in the quiet hamlet of Brushford as out of control hounds chased an injured stag through gardens and across graves in the local churchyard. The stag had previously been hit by a car. One couple in the village put their house on the market the following day and a former forestry worker called for an end to staghunting when his father's grave was trampled in the chase.

(On 15th March 1995 John McFall's Wild Mammals (Protection) Bill gained a vote of 253-nil. Unfortunately John McFall had to agree to exclude the hunting of wild animals with dogs from his Bill in order that it could proceed through the Commons and the House of Lords. It gained its unopposed third reading and became law thus enabling prosecutions to be made against anyone guilty of "kicking, beating, impaling, burning, crushing or drowning" to result in a 6 months jail sentence.)

Aug 1995
An incident occurred that was once again caught on video by hunt monitors. A very tired stag being closely chased by hounds kicked back with his hind feet trying to defend himself, but because he was running down a slope the movement bowled him over, crashing into a stream with the hounds engulfing him.

Feb 1996
A resident of Brompton Ralph wrote how the main road into Lydeard St. Lawrence was blocked by hunt vehicles and horses as a young deer ran along the main road pursued by excited, running men and dogs. He described how the hounds leapt at the deer as it tried desperately to force a gap in the fence. It was ten minutes before owners of obstructing vehicles returned, with a total disregard for the delay caused to other road users.

Apr 1996
An exhausted stag lay down in the heather on National Trust land. It had run approx. 15 miles over very hilly country and could go no further. The hunt master took aim three times with his short barrelled shotgun from a distance of no more than 5 yards. The stag's body jolted before it stood up and ran off with its jaw smashed and blood dripping from the wound. It was a further 15 minutes before this stag was finally killed with a humane killer. (This was one of the deer from which blood samples were taken for examination, contributing to Prof. Bateson's report).

Aug 1996
A local vicar spoke of his family's shock when they had their picnic at a picturesque spot by a stream disrupted by the arrival of the Devon & Somerset Staghounds. Approx. 300 riders caused absolute mayhem along a nearby road and the vicar's family had their picnic blanket trampled over by hunt supporters determined to reach the hunted stag.

Sept 1996
A week following the vicar's experience two ladies taking a peaceful stroll with their dogs on National Trust land near Horner Wood had their peace shattered and described how "all hell broke loose as the hunt came hurtling down the road after a deer with no thought for anyone in their path".

Jan 1997
A follower of the Tiverton Staghounds was found guilty at Tiverton Magistrates Court of assault on a hunt monitor. He was fined and costs given against him.

Apr 1997
A hunted stag crossed the busy North Devon link road near South Molton with hounds closely following. This caused absolute mayhem on the road with cars and lorries pulling up in all directions. People using the road were very upset at the plight of the stag and one driver remonstrated with the hunt in no uncertain terms.

4. Supporting Statement by Dr. John Henshaw, C.Biol.F.I. Biol
We follow with a copy of a statement that was prepared for us by Dr. John Henshaw as part of our submission to MPs at the time of the Second Reading of Mike Foster MP's Bill on 28th November 1997. Or. Henshaw is currently working on a wildlife assignment in the far east, but we have his permission to reproduce it to the current Inquiry.

The repetition of so many factors, all of which were previously provided to MPs when they voted in 1997, causes us to question again why it should have been considered necessary to have the Burns Inquiry. MPs were very well informed by both sides of the argument on that occasion.

DR JOHN HENSHAW, C.Biol, F.I.Biol.

PUNG WAAN RESORT, TAMBON TA SAO, AMPHUR SAIYOK

KANCHANABURI 71150, THAILAND

PRESS RELEASE

CONCERNING HUNTING DEER WITH HOUNDS AND THE DECISION OF THE NATIONAL TRUST TO BAN THIS ACTIVITY ON THEIR LANDS

Recent articles in the British press refer to the report on the study undertaken by Professor Bateson of Cambridge University and Dr Elizabeth Bradshaw concerning deer hunted with hounds, quoting the authors' and others' astonishment at the clear

cut and irrefutable results showing that hunting with hounds causes major levels of suffering. The study method involved taking blood samples from deer when they were killed and the results of subsequent tests demonstrated that damage to the animals' muscles and blood was alarming. This included the breaking up of red blood cells, total depletion of blood sugar and muscle tissue breakdown. The results provided hard evidence of exhaustion, physical damage and pain. Mr. Peter Green, veterinary surgeon member of the committee associated with the report to the National Trust, and who had previously engaged in hunting deer with hounds, is quoted as saying that: "Now there is irrefutable evidence that the (hunted) deer suffer terribly".

Some of the press reports refer to the study and its results as new science. However this is not strictly correct. There is a plentiful list of previous papers concerning the stress effects of chasing or involuntary over exertion relative to large mammals inclusive of deer, and where the syndrome is commonly referred to as myopathy or capture myopathy. Concerning deer specifically Barlow (1986) stated "The condition (capture myopathy) may be prevented by avoiding prolonged pursuit and stressful forms of restraint", and Van Reenan (1979) stated: "Be ever conscious of the animal's anxiety" and "Avoid lengthy chases which will terrify or unduly frighten the animals". Warnings such as these would remain unknown to or would be ignored by the deer hunt staff and participants, who, in my experience were generally most ignorant of the most basic knowledge concerning deer and their biology.

During the course of many years breeding park red deer in the region of the hunt activities, and particularly near Chumleigh and later Stoodleigh, both in North Devon, I observed many signs of stress, locomotion difficulty and seperation of deer calves from their dams, both during and following the hunts. In March, 1989 I and my assistant became involved with a red deer stag calf found in a distressed condition following the hunt. This animal was in obvious pain, but bore no signs of external injury, and it could no longer control its muscular activity and could not even raise its head from the ground. A veterinary surgeon called in to examine this deer described its condition in terms of a stress problem. By the following day this deer had deteriorated and was unable to eat of drink. Due to the obvious severe pain and deteriorating condition I shot this unfortunate animal to prevent further suffering.

A blood sample was taken from this deer and submitted for analysis to the Ministry of Agriculture, Veterinary Investigation Centre, at Starcross near Exeter. When compared with known normal blood values the results led to a conclusion by the examining officer that the measured values were "consistent with acute myopathy".

A paper concerning this deer and with observations made relative to the problems caused to deer exposed to prolonged stress or pursuit episodes was published (Henshaw and Allen 1989). Clearly, a sample of one does not provide conclusive and quantitative evidence although it can be regarded as an indicator. Due to the serious nature of the myopathy syndrome in general and the specifics of prolonged chase episodes to which the red deer of the region were treated our paper made

Recommendations that a quantitative blood sampling and analysis programme be undertaken for deer killed by different methods, including hunting with hounds. Our recommendation was that this study should be undertaken by a research institution or university.

Unfortunately, six years elapsed before such a study was concerned, plus a further two years up to the publication of the conclusion. In that time, and at an estimated 130 deer per annum, as many as perhaps 1,000+ red deer have died through this cruelest, most painful and wholly unnecessary method. This does not account for deer also chased by the hunts but not directly killed by them. At various times during my residence in the region I found deer lying dead in the sections hunted with hounds and which showed no evidence of malnutrition or external wounding. The possibility of numbers of deer dying in this way is mentioned in the reports of Professor Bateson's work.

It should be recorded that the publication of our paper in 1989 drawing attention to the problem and calling for an appropriate study was met with overt hostility from various hunt groups and persons, and attracted very little interest in the Deer Liason Committee - having members drawn from all the major organisations involved with deer matters nationally, and of which I was the Institute of Biology representative. A follow-up paper (Henshaw, 1991) which presented the case for professional management of the deer by a national agency, as an alternative to hunting by hounds was treated in the same way as the first paper.

The importance and value of the Bateson report cannot be diminished, but it has to be said that the nature of mypoathy has been long known, also its potential as a likely cause of severe and unwarranted suffering the red deer of the West Country. The conclusions of Professor Bateson's study will assist in the development of a more rational and humane system for deer control and management, though it is sad to consider that the attitudes prevailed to ignore the red light of suffering by deer that had been switched on such a long time before.

What should also have been considered were the extraordinary levels of ignorance and deception practiced by the hunts and their supporters and which have long reflected to more rational agencies the hiding of the realities of deer hunting with hounds. It was, and still is, frequently repeated that the deer "enjoy" the hunting. Even now, the Master of the Quantocks Staghounds is claiming that "You can say goodbye to red deer, the only places in the country where there are deer are where there is hunting". Those who know deer, and who have no wish to mislead the public from motives of chasing them, are fully aware that substantial deer populations exist throughout the country, the vast proportion of which is mercifully free of the hunts.

References

Barlow, R.M., 1986
Capture Myopathy. In: Management and Diseases of Deer.
Ed. T.L. Alexander. Veterinary Deer Society Publication, 254 pp.

Henshaw, J., & R. Allen, 1989.
A case of Suspected Capture Myopathy in a West Country Red Deer.
Deer, 7(9), 293-467.

Henshaw, J., 1991.
The Future For Red Deer on the Quantocks and Exmoor - the Case for Professional Management by a National Agency.
Deer, 8(5), 293-295.

Van Reenan, G., 1979.
The Perils of P.C.M.
The Deer Farmer, Spring Issue, 34 & 38.

21 April 1997

International Services in Environmental and Wildlife Management

5. HUNT HAVOC Items within this section are regarded as a very important part of our submission. Some of the many incidents listed under para 3 could have been included here, but we include below incidents that have been covered in letters to the press from local people caught up in them. The first two record a buckhunt in the village of Bawdrip near Bridgwater; in the second a local farmer writes of all the occasions in this current season that the Quantock Staghounds have trespassed onto her land. Janet White wrote a similar letter over seven years ago so nothing has changed :

February 1999, issue No. 62 POLDEN POST

West Somerset Free Press 14/1/2000

The following letter was written by a resident of the National Trust village of Luccombe just prior to the ban over their land coming into effect. The same person wrote another letter subsequent to the ban indicating how much her life had changed for the better :

West Somerset Free Press 9th May 1997

The following page includes just a very small selection of letters from members of the public, both local and holiday visitors, who have been caught up in incidents with the staghounds. Page 12 covers an incident in 1998 which was reported by the North Devon Journal, and the first of a correspondence that followed.

It must not be assumed that objection to deer hunting with hounds is a new phenomenon as far as 'locals' are concerned. We have newspaper cuttings From as far back as August 1925 when a meeting was held in Lynton, North Devon, following an incident when a well-known stag was hunted and crashed to his death from the clifftop, breaking his neck, leg and antlers in the fall. Messages of support for an end to such cruelty were sent to the meeting from the writer, John Galsworthy, along with many others and the meeting was addressed by the Hon. Stephen Coleridge. The following cutting from the North Devon Journal Herald of August 1973 indicates how reluctant locals have been to speak out against hunting for fear of losing their job, or of losing work if self employed. This is true to the present day because the hunts include very powerful people.

5. HUNT HAVOC cont'd. There are other aspects to 'Hunt Havoc' than those involving specific incidents that impinge directly on other people. These relate to environmental damage caused by hunting (over primarily Sites of Special Scientific Interest on the Quantocks and Exmoor). The following photograph was part of an article published in the Some/set County Gazette of 24.2.90 showing the damage caused by hunt vehicles. This was a subject repeated frequently and in the Western Daily Press of 24.2.94 the article that follows appeared:

In 1990 Somerset County Council, concerned about the degree of damage, prepared a Management Plan for the hills. We quote from paragraphs within that plan as follows :

"18.08 (ii) Stag hunting.............The progress of the hunt is usually followed by many people, some who watch from hilltop vantage points and others who attempt to follow more closely in cars, 4 wheel drive vehicles or on motor cycles. The number of motorised followers have increased greatly in recent years. On average perhaps 60 vehicles and motorcycles now attend a stag hunting meeting and about half will attempt to follow the hunt rather than simply park and watch Though the local farming community and retired people make up the largest groups of followers, many people come great distances to watch the hunt on a regular basis."

The paragraph quoted above outlines a degree of concern about the number of motorised followers and indicates that not all of those are locals. And in para 18.34:

"18.34 (i) Sports: .......Hunt following in vehicles, which is not a necessary part of deer hunting with hounds, is widely seen as the single biggest threat to conservation of natural beauty because of track creation, erosion and widening......... "

"18.42 As well as considering the types of use, the question of the degree, extent or regularity of use needs to be addressed. There was a strong consensus that the volume of use which the hills are expected to accommodate is increasing steadily and has now become excessive for such a small area and inconsistent with the conservation of natural beauty (including flora and fauna) required......."

"18.43 .........Damage to surface vegetation is more easily identifiable on the ground and from aerial photographs, but a few vehicles or horses in wet weather will do more damage than many more after a dry period ............"

"18.44 Nevertheless there is a clear obligation where there is any degree of doubt to err in favour of conservation of landscape and wildlife and there now appears to be a consensus that the current pressures of use are excessive, are increasing, and need firm measures".

Following the above paragraphs that clearly established concern about overuse and the need for measures to combat the consequences of this, consideration was given to a proposal for 'quiet months' and 'event free days'. A decision was made that December and January, as two of the wettest months, and June (deer calving) should be declared 'quiet months' and that Wardens would seek to maintain Fridays as 'event free days' throughout the year. It was stressed that "The intention is more to ensure that at the very least these times and areas are safeguarded...".

ll was felt these proposals reflected the general view "that the hills are so busy these days that they need some respite from the increasing pressures" and it was underlined that the co-operation of hill users was vital to their success. Organisations known to be regular users were therefore notified in addition to general publicity given to the proposals.

In April 1995 a Report from the Quantock Wardens contained the following paragraph indicating that, whilst most regular users (e.g. the Ramblers) were prepared to co-operate with the County Council's proposals, the hunts simply ignored them:

"Over the four month period there have been 67 notified organised events (an overall level of one event every 1.8 days). 29 events took place during the 'quiet months' of December and January giving rise to significant erosion in places during the particularly wet weather. These 'quiet months' form part of both fox and hind hunting seasons and over 90% of the events were hunting meets."

5. HUNT HAVOC cont'd. The situation regarding hunting over Exmoor National Park (SSSI) has frequently caused us puzzlement. The National Parks issue a publicity document headed 'Quiet Enjoyment in National Parks' and the first paragraph reads:

"Those who come to National Parks should be such as wish to enjoy and cherish the beauty and quietude of unspoilt country and to take their recreation, active or passive, in ways that do not impair the beauty or quietude, nor spoil the enjoyment of them by others". (our underlining)

We follow with stills taken from a video of the massed forces of the Devon & Somerset Staghounds, plus their entourage of vehicles and motor cycles during a hunt on Exmoor. It is frequently virtually impossible on hunt days for anyone using the road, unconnected with the hunt, to make progress. Those who pay a regular subscription to the hunts will frequently display a sticker to this effect on their windscreen, but vehicles not indicating this will have an arm thrust through any open window demanding a 'cap' as a contribution to hunt funds. 1t was reported in the local press in March 1998 that a man from Lynton died of a heart attack at the wheel of his car after an altercation with members of the hunt.

One of the problems with Exmoor National Park is that a number of those who sit on their Committees are themselves involved with hunting or relatives of those who do!

6. HUNT HAVOC specifically on Sites of Special Scientific Interest.

In 1998, having corresponded with the Minister for the Environment, this Association was placed on the list of consultees for a consultation document '"Sites of Special Scientific Interest Better Protection and Management".

In a submission we referred to the fact that we had for years stressed to the National Trust and the Exmoor National Park that in our view no hunting should be allowed over moorland designated as SSSI where we have ground nesting birds that were being disturbed during the final weeks of hind and stag hunting seasons.

We took the view that a strengthening of the powers applied to SSSls could well stop all hunting 'at a stroke'. We have, therefore, been particularly interested to read the attached article in the Western Daily Press of 19.1.2000. We would like to have seen hunts included in the last sentence of this article but perhaps that would be too much to expect of peers!

The photographs of 4x4 vehicles and motor cycles on the preceding pages substantiate our view.

7. The socio-economic effects of a hunt ban.

In endeavouring to make a case for the retention of hunting, the hunting lobby rely heavily on the number of jobs that they claim would be lost if hunting were to be banned and the lost income from tourism etc.

We understand from the local press that both the hunt lobby and members of West Somerset District Council (in some instances one and the same people!) will be inviting the Inquiry team (and Ken Livingstone) "to see at first hand the problems a ban would have on the rural economy". It is claimed that the seven packs of deer/fox/hare hounds support 192 full-time hunting related jobs, with a spin off effect on another 417 jobs in other industries. They claim that the total value to the local economy is £5.5 million. These figures have been produced in the second of two reports by the Centre for Rural Studies at the Cirencester Royal Agricultural College. The first report from the same source was produced for the National Trust in 1993. The two reports were the work of two slightly different teams (although some members were common to both), but were headed by Professor Michael Winter (a member of the Burns Inquiry) in the first instance and Professor Will Manley in the second.

We believe it to be particularly relevant that, for the second report, much of the data was gleaned from lists of subscribers to the various hunts and two parishes particularly noted as containing many hunt supporters. Because of the renewed debate caused by publication of the second Cirencester report I had a lengthy letter published in The West Somerset Free Press on 19.2.99 referring specifically to the disparity between the two reports:

The opportunity has to be taken under this heading to re-emphasise that the hunting of wild animals with a pack of hounds for sport has to be a moral issue and no arguments about loss of jobs can be justified. We have used the analogy above with bull fighting in Spain. We believe we lose credibility as a nation when we attempt to criticise or bring to an end the cruel treatment of animals in other countries for so long as we are prepared to accept the perpetuation of the cruelty of hunting here. In addition to the cruelty imposed on the hunted creature, hounds are short

lived and will be discarded if their feet become damaged on the harsh terrain etc. Horses kept specifically for hunting can also be misused and over used. There could be better control over both with draghunting.

7. The socio-economic effects of a hunt ban cont'd. In our view there can be no doubt that hunting takes place as a social activity. The hunters are frequently the first to admit that most attend for the ride and few are present at the end of a chase. Social activities continue with activities like fund raising whist drives etc. and hunt balls, but these are not sufficient reasons for hunting a living creature and all could be continued with drag hunting. The vast majority of non hunting people who live in the country manage to have interesting social lives that revolve around numerous clubs and societies covering a wide range of different interests from evening classes, writers' circles to crafts etc. and if hunters refuse to take part in drag hunting they will have to adapt accordingly.

8. A majority of farmers on Exmoor and the Quantock Hills support hunting-but do they? In the middle of the 1 920s a 'front company' called the Badgworthy Land Company was formed and controlled by senior members of the staghunts. The purpose of this company was continually to seek out landowning farmers in need of finance or the owners of farms that were put up for sale, or those who actually hunted, and gradually they have acquired 11,000 acres of land which they own and the 'sporting rights' over an additional 50,000 acres. This means that any subsequent purchasers of farms or land will find that the power to control hunting over their land is in the ownership of the Badgworthy Land Company.

Most solicitors will inform prospective purchasers that this is the case, but, for example in the case of farms owned by Somerset County Council, the Badgworthy Land Company have acquired the hunting rights, so tenants of County Council farms have to be prepared to permit the staghunts over their land. In one instance on the Quantock Hills a young farmer and his wife, who owned a 200 acre farm, purchased some further acres adjoining their land at auction. They did not approve of hunting and had prevented the Quantock Staghounds from coming onto their land. But only after the purchase of the additional acres they found that they had no option but to allow the hunt over those acres because the Badgworthy Land Company held the sporting rights in perpetuity. The whole issue was presented on local BBC television in a programme called 'The Carve Up' which we have on video. The farmers wrote to Sir Robin Dunn, Chairman of the Badgworthy Land Company, asking if they could buy back the hunting rights over their additional land, but they were refused.

On page 9 of this submission we have included a letter from another farmer on the Quantocks listing the number of times in the current season that the Quantock Staghounds have trespassed on her land even though they have been told on numerous occasions that they are not welcome.

Some of those farmers who do not like hunting are reluctant to voice their opinions or they find themselves socially ostracised and it can be difficult to sell their products or animals at farmers' markets.

9. Most of our submission had been written by the time we received the official invitation to participate. This has meant that we have not given our evidence in accordance with the specific headings and questions provided. However the very last questions, 15, 16 & 17, relate to what form a ban might take and how it should be applied and enforced. Our own views on this are:

(a) A ban should be covered by an Act of Parliament. Numbers of hunts have ceased to exist over recent years where new roads over parts of their territory have made it impossible for them to continue. Similarly the New Forest Buckhounds disbanded largely as a result of a Forestry Commission ban. Here, on the Quantock Hills in particular, the Quantock Staghounds are finding it very difficult to continue without trespass since the National Trust and Forestry Commission bans have been imposed. They are very frequently

hunting for the second time each week on the territory of the Devon & Somerset Staghounds at their invitation. The Devon & Somerset and the Tiverton Staghounds are in a slightly different situation from the Quantock Staghounds as Exmoor covers a much larger area than the Quantocks. Although the National Trust ban has certainly affected the D. & SS there is still a large area of the Exmoor National Park (SSSI) that they can hunt over. However, a ban in our view should be speedily implemented. Too much time allowed for disbandment would simply provide an opportunity for further delaying tactics.

(b) The Act should specify that any hounds remaining should only be retrained for draghunts and that it would be illegal for them to hunt a live quarry. Heavy fines should be imposed if this should happen.

(c) We believe that as far as deer are concerned, coinciding with a ban on them being hunted with a pack of dogs, measures should be put in place, possibly as amendments to existing deer Acts that would cover the setting up of management groups to oversee the control of numbers that an area could sustain based on numbers/age and sex ratios. The control should be undertaken by highly trained rnarksmen using rifles with telescopic sights, using high seats wherever practicable. Again we refer to the fact that this is how deer are managed in every other area of the country where they exist, and to the two enclosures from the Forestry Commission and West Country Deer Management.

We would also like to see a tagging system for deer carcasses in place where only those that are tagged are regarded as having been killed legitimately. Game dealers and hoteliers would be aware of this and poachers would find it more difficult to pass on poached venison.

10. The National Trust and deerhunting with dogs. I referred briefly on page 1 of this submission to the fact that, in 1990, I proposed and the Chairman of this Association, Diana Wilson, seconded a resolution to the AGM of the Trust seeking the support of members to a ban on deer

hunting on Trust land. Subsequent to the successful resolution an 1nquiry was set up headed by the late Professor Robert Savage, who was a member of the Trust's Council nominated by the Linnean Society. We were most unhappy about this internal appointment and the subsequent report, particularly so as the terms of reference did not include examination of the stress factor in hunted deer and this had been the very nub of our written submission when presenting our resolution. There were over 17,000 resignations from the Trust because of their failure to implement the resolution.

Two years later an Extraordinary General Meeting of the Trust was called. The resolution seeking an independent Inquiry into the stress factors affecting hunted deer was even more successful than the first. It was subsequent to this that Professor Patrick Bateson was appointed, together with Dr. Elizabeth Bradshaw to oversee the necessary field work. Professor Bateson, a noted scientist and Fellow of the Royal Society, was accepted by all sides to the argument. Twelve named scientists were also appointed as assessors to this Inquiry.

I was interviewed on a couple of occasions by Professor Bateson and Elizabeth Bradshaw during the period of their inquiry. As one might have expected, both were extremely professional, and I did not once have any idea of how their findings would be reported. Professor Bateson simply repeated on a couple of occasions that "we can only go where the science leads us" which 1 regarded as fair comment.

However, we were naturally delighted when, in the spring of 1997, Professor Bateson's report went to the Council of the Trust indicating his view that the potential level of stress and suffering experienced by the hunted animal in any hunt was unacceptable.

It has to be recorded that, from the time of the publication of his report to the Trust in 1997 Professor Bateson has suffered from unremitting attack on his professional expertise from the pro-hunt lobby. This has taken the form of sometimes quite scurrilous letters to both the local and national press, and the production of a series of counter reports paid for by the British Field Sports Society/Countryside Alliance. It has been difficult at times to counter these because of the clear pro-hunting bias of some newspapers who have not been prepared to give equal coverage to the anti-hunt side.

I have left this part of our submission to the last because, on 27th January 2000, the Council of the National Trust met once again to consider a report known as the Joint Universities Study (funded as stated above) together with a response from Professor Bateson. This latter was notable, not only for the science presented, but for the illustrious list of names in the scientific world who have given unstinting support to the Bateson position. The list also includes the words of a deer farmer from Scotland who offers to show anyone interested the way deer can easily be placed under stress. The National Trust has reaffirmed its previous decision.

There have been offers from the local hunts to take the members of the Burns Inquiry out on hunts. I would suggest that if those members take up this offer they will see precisely what the hunters want them to see no more, no less. It is to be hoped that, if this offer is accepted the offer of the Scottish farmer will also be accepted.

It is our understanding that the Bateson Report will be presented to the Inquiry. We believe that, coupled with the videos that will be submitted, this will prove unanswerable in contending that a ban on deer hunting with dogs has to be enforced. We believe too that our submission represents the views of a majority of people living in the area where it takes place.

We wish to include a final word about the Burns inquiry. We have already registered our view that this Inquiry is misconceived. We believe it to be patronising to those MPs who voted so overwhelmingly for a ban on 28th November 1997. It suggests that they were unaware of the facts and hadn't done their homework sufficiently well before coming to their decision. Most of the information we have provided was available to them as was that from numerous other organisations. When has such an Inquiry ever been set up after such a landmark vote as a prelude to yet another vote? We have also lodged our strong reservations as to the composition of the Committee of Inquiry. Lord Soulsby was one of those funded, so we understand, by the pro

hunt lobby, to criticise the Bateson Report. Two have connections with the Cirencester agricultural college that has its own pack of beagles. We have received no answer to our question asking who recommended the names on this panel. We have been told that they were appointed by the Home Secretary but the Home Secretary is most unlikely personally to know these names and will have had them recommended to him by whom? We have also asked who among the appointees balances Lord Soulsby's expressed views because there is not one name that is recognised by the anti-hunt side as sympathetic to their view. Similarly we have had no answer to this question. We understand it may be the intention of some animal welfare groups to boycott the Inquiry, so disenchanted do they feel about it. However, just as in the past we urged disenchanted National Trust members to continue their membership, we are participating, albeit reluctantly, because we believe our voice must be heard.

Yours sincerely

Doreen Cronin (Mrs)

Secretary

Date uploaded to site 13 April 2000