Lord Burns
PO Box 31010
LONDON
SW1H 9ZL

29 February 2000

Dear Lord Burns,

As Assembly Members representing rural constituencies, we would like to make the following comments in regard to the inquiry into hunting with dogs. In our view the act of hunting and hunting with dogs are inseparable actions that are totally interdependent and inseparable. To ban hunting would not only be contradictory to personal freedoms and societal cohesion; it would also be detrimental to our wildlife and have a negative impact on certain animal welfare.

There are a number of ways in which dogs are used for hunting. These range from tracking and burrowing, to retrieving the prey. Indeed most forms of hunting would quickly become impractical or impossible with the exclusion of dogs. For many breeds of dogs such as the Labrador or Terrier, hunting forms part of their natural behaviour. Without proper training and control, the natural impulse of the hunting dogs would pose a threat to livestock and wildlife.

Hunting in the countryside is essential to regulate the balance of wild animals. An uncontrolled surge in population would pose a threat to agriculture and the environment in addition to public health as they encroached on urban areas. There is no evidence that dogs, which are involved in hunting, increases the fear and pain of wild animals beyond what would normally be experienced in the hunting process. Becoming, at different times prey and/or predator is a natural part of how nature functions.

Hunting with dogs is an ancient practice, which has deep social implications in the countryside. In West Wales, hunting is a necessity and hunting with dogs is the most efficient means of hunting. It is not a ‘hooray-henry’ sporting activity; but rather a means of maintaining livelihoods and controlling pests. It is not acceptable for the anti-hunting lobby, which has a naïve perception on nature and wildlife, to undermine this social, environmental and economically essential practice by influencing a populist minded government. Because of its social, environmental and financial importance many rural inhabitants may choose not to give up the act of hunting with dogs, even if a ban was imposed. A ban would therefore criminalise a large number of non-malicious people. It would be totally contrary to peoples’ freedoms and civil rights to introduce a ban on hunting with dogs.

Yours sincerely,

Back to top

Date uploaded to site 31 May 2000