Facts about hunting with dogs
Question 1.
Answer: Please see the covering INTRODUCTORY GUIDE TO SALUKI COURSING
Rural Economy
Question 2.
Answer: The Coursing Section of the Saluki or Gazelle Hound Club contributes about £8-10,000 annually directly to the rural economy in the form of payments to landowners, farmers, keepers, Judges, Slippers, providers of horses and beaters and several thousand Pounds indirectly in the form of payments to pubs, hotels and restaurants for accommodation, food and drink. These payments are made in areas of low incomes and in the winter months when tourist trade is meagre. Saluki coursers also purchase from mainly rural suppliers suitable clothing for all-weather coursing and equipment for their hounds such as slip leads, collars, leads, coats, etc.
In addition both members and non-members course privately at any time during the coursing season, except on Sundays, and make payments to landowners and farmers as well as to local restaurants and pubs.
Question 3.
Answer: The incomes of those people at present benefiting from the above payments would be reduced proportionately.
Question 4.
Answer: The alternatives to coursing live hare with Salukis are lure coursing and track racing. Both are practised to a limited extent but they make very little contribution to the rural economy and even if increased would not offset the loss of income described above. Lure coursing for all breeds of Sighthounds is organised on a modest scale by the British Sighthound Field Association about 6 times a year and involves a payment to a landowner for the hire of a field. The BSFA owns its own lure gear. The meetings last only one day and most participants do not use local accommodation or restaurants. Racing is loosely organised about once a month at a small number of tracks around the country where participants pay for each run.
Salukis are not sprinters, like Greyhounds and Whippets, but middle distance runners and many do not take to the track or the lure, as both these activities are run over a relatively short distance. Salukis are also intelligent and will pre-empt the lure by cutting corners. The artificiality and predictability of the lure do not test Salukis’ capabilities.
Agriculture and pest control
Question 5.
Answer: Keepers often speak about the damage done by hares to crops: a rule of thumb is that five hares will eat the same amount of grass as two sheep; and many resort to periodic shoots when hundreds are killed in a day. Salukis kill so few hares that they do not have an appreciable impact on the size of hare populations. They may be inclined to kill the weaker hares, which is probably good for the general health of hare populations.
Question 6.
Answer: Salukis kill quickly and efficiently but relatively few hares. Shooting is the main method of control. It is generally effective, though some hares may be only wounded to die slowly later. Our Salukis occasionally dispatch hares which have been so wounded. From time to time a qualified veterinary member of the SGHC Coursing Section carries out pathology on hares caught by the Salukis to examine their state of health and reports any abnormalities to the landowner or farmer concerned.
Question 7.
Answer: Many landowners say that they tolerate hares on their land only because they wish to provide enough for the Salukis and other Sighthounds to course. If coursing were banned, it is almost certain that they would eliminate the hares by increased shooting.
Question 8.
Answer: One of the possible consequences of a ban is an increase in illegal coursing. Such coursing is already widespread and often leads to conflict between landowners and farmers and illegal coursers. The latter are for the most part not solitary poachers but organised groups involved in betting on match coursing, the outcome of which is dependent on the number of hares killed. To prevent such hare coursing would require a considerable increase in policing, as present resources are inadequate for the existing task, let alone any increase.
Social and Cultural Life of the Countryside
Question 9.
Answer: Coursing with Salukis brings together people from a wide cross-section of life, not all of whom are necessarily country dwellers. They all share a common interest in the countryside and the amenity it provides for them and their hounds and are anxious to preserve it. There are no barriers on grounds of class, creed or colour. Landowners and farmers welcome Saluki coursers for the employment they give and for the role they play in maintaining the long coursing tradition in their area. The Coursing Section has never encountered local opposition; on the contrary local people are keen to join in either as beaters or as spectators. Local pubs, hotels and restaurants welcome the trade which we bring. A ban on coursing would be the loss of another thread that binds the web of country life together.
Question 10.
Answer: The contribution coursing makes to the social and cultural life of the countryside can be judged by the positive welcome with which the Coursing Section are received everywhere we course and in the invitations we receive to speak about coursing and to show our coursing hounds at country fairs and other functions. It would be missed if it were not there.
Management and Conservation of Wildlife
Question 11.
Answer- Some landowners and farmers will encourage a hare population to increase to ensure enough for competitive coursing, though few deliberately improve habitats for hares in the way that they do for , say, pheasants. However some recognise the need to leave the stubble unturned for a further period after the shooting season is over. This extra cover is good for the hares against their natural predators at a time when they are coming towards the main breeding season in the Spring. It also provides the best running conditions for Sighthounds.
As the hare lives in the open, coursing does no damage to its habitat. It is doubtful whether coursing has much effect on the quality of the breeding stock, as so few are killed, but it is probable that among those hares that are killed are the weaker and less successful ones at survival.
Question 12.
Answer- As mentioned above, if coursing were banned some farmers would be less likely to tolerate large hare populations and would shoot them rather than attract the attentions of illegal coursing and poaching. The hare population would undoubtedly suffer if , as a result of a ban on fox hunting, the number of foxes increased significantly. There is evidence that hares are more numerous where foxes are controlled, according to the Game Conservancy.
Animal Welfare
Question 13.
Answer- There is no evidence that the hare suffers any more from being pursued by a Saluki than by its other natural predators. The course is typically decided in a matter of only one or two minutes and ends more often than not with the hare escaping. The hare is designed for rapid running and can usually keep ahead of a Saluki for long enough to reach cover. There is no evidence of harmful after-effects, e g hares are not picked afterwards in a state of shock or suffering from over-exertion; on the contrary the hare usually goes straight back to doing whatever it was engaged in previously. If the hare is caught it is killed quickly and dropped: it is not torn apart or eaten on the spot. Owners are conscious of the need to husband the physical resources of their hounds and they would not enter a hound for a course that was in any way injured or exhausted. Salukis hardly ever encounter other forms of wildlife or domestic animals during the course, so the question of other animals being affected does not arise. Occasionally deer or foxes are seen but the hounds are then secured until the animal has passed out of sight: their owners are just as keen to avoid damage to their hounds as the animals are to avoid being chased.
Question 14.
Answer- As stated above, if the size of the hare population were to rise unacceptably in terms of damage to crops, farmers would resort to increased shooting. This is usually mortal for the hare but occasionally some might be only wounded and would die later.
Implementing a Ban
Question 15.
Answer- Implementing a ban bristles with practical and financial difficulties. Undoubtedly the Coursing Section would obey the law if a ban were imposed. This would mean disbanding the Coursing Section and winding up its affairs. Individual members would have to wrestle with their own consciences about what they did afterwards. Much would depend on how the law were worded. If it were a total ban with swingeing penalties for any breach, some might be inclined to put down their hounds and call it day rather than confine their hounds in order to avoid accidental breaches of the law. If the ban were only partial and allowed coursing under even more stringent controls, some owners might be inclined to continue. The implications of a ban for the hare population would probably be severe, as indicated above.
Question 16.
Answer- Applying and enforcing the ban would have to be undertaken with a good deal more efficiency than is the case with the present laws, e g the Hares Act of 1848. There are no reliable figures for hares killed by illegal coursers and poachers but it is believed to be far in excess of the number killed in organised coursing of some 400-450 hares a year. The increase in recent years of the illegal activity is due to a number of factors, including the greater financial and technical resources of those involved at a time of a decline in police numbers, and a total ban would require more policing and much heavier penalties to act as a deterrent.
Question 17.
Answer- It is possible that a ban might be mitigated to a limited extent by the investment of official resources in improving the fairly basic facilities for lure coursing and racing to bring them up to the standard of those in some other countries where hare coursing is banned, e g Germany or Switzerland, but it is doubtful how many owners would avail themselves of them for the reasons stated above of the Saluki’s attitude to the artificial lure.
Date uploaded to site 5 May 2000