The Burns Inquiry
Mr Brian Caffarey .
Dear Sir
Here is the submission of the Surrey Wildlife Preservation Group. Firstly a little back ground on us and our position in the debate.
We formed as a group in 1983 in response to complaints about the actions of the local fox hunt. We campaign on many fronts providing speakers, information, stalls and arrange public meetings. Much of our work involves research and investigation often in conjunction with wildlife hospitals, badger groups and police wildlife officers.
We have accumulated a wealth of information on the subject of fox hunting from every available source, from historical document through to everyday sources concerning every aspect of the ‘sport’.
Most importantly we gather data direct from those involved at grass roots level with observers at the hunts from start to finish. This has given us a valuable insight in to the motivation and reasoning used to support and promote the way of hunting with hounds. We have structured our responses around the headings given in the guidelines you have provided.
Your sincerely
Graham Richards
SWPG
PO Box 217
Woodbridge Meadows
Guildford
GU1 1WS
To jump to a particular section click the link
Social and Cultural Life of the Countryside
Management and Conservation of Wildlife
Facts about hunting with dogs.
Promotional Literature for our local hunt, The Surrey Union Foxhounds, presents itself in the form of a brochure that sells itself as a 'members' club, emphasising a good ride, beautiful countryside and a season of social events. In passing it gives a couple of lines to the killing of foxes because, they say, because farmers want them to.
The Surrey Union describes its Country as running from Pirbright in the west via Guildford, Dorking and Riegate in the east. Within these boundaries there are over a thousand farms and other properties with land. By cross referencing lists of all their meets and mapping out the actual routes each hunting day only around 12% of this 'country' is actually used to hunt on. Looking further into actual land ownership half a dozen individuals (most of whom are in the top position of the hunt) own large hunted areas. They are Jayes Park, Wotton Estate, Albury Estates and the Seale Estate. Tenant farmers within these areas will often have no choice as to whether the hunt operates on their land. Surrey County Council and local borough councils have banned them from hunting on their land.
Many of the meets are variations of the same area and much of each day is spent on bridalways and roads linking the land on which they have permission to hunt on. A further 5% of the land used by the hunt includes National Trust, Forestry Commission, English Nature and the M.o.D. all of whom have either limit the hunt to the paths and/or restrict the behaviour of the hunt, i.e., no 'holding up', flushing out or digging out.
Another large area of land at the heart of their country, the Hurtwood, which is publicly owned with restrictions on digging up and disturbing wildlife.
Individual landowners who invite the hunt often do so with provisions such as sticking to certain areas, for example, only riding around the edges of fields and no digging out. Limits may also apply to a certain time of day so as not to interfere with farming activities or disturbing neighbours livestock.
As most riders go to meets nearest to them they are organised to dot about 'Their Country' to keep members happy. There are incidents every season where the hunt have been asked to leave land on which they do not have permission to be on. "If the hounds are in full flight they cannot be stopped" said by a member of the Surrey Union to Mrs Sheila Padley, Bentworth Hall Lodge, Bentworth, after she told the hunt they were not welcome. Many people that we have spoken to who wish to complain about hunting activities such as trespass, hounds rioting or the hunt blocking roads do not know how to or who to direct their grievances.
The Surrey Union Foxhounds employs two people full time and three people part time and as far as we can ascertain there are no businesses locally that would suffer inordinately with the closing down of the hunt. When interviewed about the banning of hunting riders have consistently said that they would not give up riding. No livery stables rely solely on hiring out hunting horses- foxhunting only takes place six months out of the year.
A switch to drag hunting would seem to have no obstacles locally; in fact, some new land would be available, such as Surrey County Council and borough council land from which the Surrey Union is barred from at the moment. Local businesses may be more likely to invest in the ethical option and local animal welfare groups would put their efforts into supporting and encouraging rather than putting obstacles in the way of hunting live quarry. (Interestingly the Surrey Union are often effectively on a drag hunt and don't realise it when the local group of Hunt Saboteurs lay a false trail for them to follow).
When interviewed nearly 90% of the riders are not interested in whether they catch the fox or not - they are there for the ride.
As with most hunts the Surrey Union does not print a target of kills before each season or how many they actually account for. There is a tendency by the hunt officials to exaggerate their proficiency and claim kills at the end of the day when it has been clearly seen not to be the case. Our monitors shadow the hunt and check the hounds at the end of the day for bloodstains on their muzzles, as would be the case if they had killed. We may also verify the day's events with the mounted police officers that ride with the huntsman at every meet. Of the eighteen meets our observers have attended so this season only one kill has occurred.
During the whole season a generous estimate would be approximately twelve kills with as many as half of those during the cubhunting season. We estimate that this is probably how many foxes are killed on roads in Surrey every couple of days.
A survey of 385 farms in the areas hunted by the Surrey Union carried out by the Surrey Wildlife Preservation Group in 1990 showed similar results to the surveys carried out in other areas of the country. The results from the 223 returned questionnaires closely paralled those of an independent survey (NOP) conducted in 1994. Where a landowner considered that a fox may be a pest and need controlling the preferred method was shooting. The survey showed that the reason why the hunt was not involved was because people felt that they were, ineffective, caused damaged to property and had a negative effect on livestock. One person surveyed cited worries over the spread of disease by hounds. This refers to the tagnia hydatigena tapeworm passed on through feeding the dogs on raw meat from "fallen stock". Without the collection of farmers fallen stock hunts could not afford to feed their packs. Another respondent rubbished the idea that somebody who wanted a fox killed would wait the hunt was coming to their area. What if they did not catch it? What if the meet was cancelled - would they wait until the next season?
It has been admitted by a number of many hunts that fox numbers are encouraged by artificial earths. Many hunt supporting farmers don't interfere with the foxes on their property so that once a season there is a chance when the hunt comes around they something to chase and kill. A favourite area for the surrey Union is Wickland farm in Forrest Green. A hunt committee member owns this farm and they nearly always pick up a scent there. Just over the road in the same village is Waterland farm owned by the chairperson of the hunt, who in a letter complained to a county councillor about a fox killing three of sheep. He could not of course prove that they had not already been dead before the fox got to them, nor could he explain why his hunt had not been more efficient. Maybe he could at least talk to his neighbour across the road to find where the fox came from!
Social and Cultural Life of the Countryside.
The Surrey Union has a very small following in the country considering size of the overall population of Surrey many of its followers come from other counties. Certainly a large amount of them come from London (they are known as a commuter hunt). There are no amenities that rely on the hunt. Where a village hall or pub is used in part of their social calendar it is once or twice a year. Equestrian events associated with hunting could exist separately from it or with the promotion of drag hunting all the social functions can continue as before.
As with the rest of the population the vast majority of people, including people from rural areas who are near to hunt meets object to the chasing and killing of 'their' wildlife.
In 1990 then hunt master of the Surrey Union Nick Fawcett said on BBC Radio 4 "I don’t think I have seen a meet this year where we have not gone through somebodys garden".
Management and Conservation of Wildlife
Similar to the rest of the country the rural landscape in Surrey is in general, kept for aesthetic reasons or, according to farmers we have spoken to, for practical reasons such as windbreaks as in the case of hedges and trees. Considering the amount of subsidies many farmers receive and grants for habitat conservation the threat of vandalism to the environment if hunting is banned by some individuals sets them apart from the majority of country lovers we have come in contact.
As far as 'management' of the fox population is concerned the Surrey Union foxhunt spokesman Mark Sprake MFH, claims that his hunt only kills "Old and infirm foxes". He is unable to explain how this applies to cub hunting or how his hounds can distinguish between young, old, fit, unwell or pregnant foxes (some vixens carry young late in December which is in the middle of the hunting season). He is also unable to explain the perfectly healthy fox killed on the 12th Feb this year after the corpse was retrieved and taken for an autopsy by local anti hunt campaigners. "If a deer gets up in the same covert and you can’t get to the hounds, you can’t stop them" quote by Mrs Prudence Goodchild, former Surrey Union Hunt Master from the Wildlife Guardian newspaper.
We observe over the local hunt from start to finish and we are often in at the kill and see more than many of the actual hunt riders. Also, we see a lot more than an inquiry team visiting a hunt kennels (rather like looking at how cows are slaughtered in an abattoir by visiting them on the farm).
During fox hunting the hunted animal may die in one of three ways.
Most foxes are killed by the terriermen. The concern here is that two animals (terrier and fox) are forced to fight and can suffer terrible injuries. (We have photographic evidence to the damage to terriers). A dig out can last several hours during which the trauma to the fox can only be imagined.
In the case of the hounds catching up with the fox it is often disorientated because its earth has been blocked, or when cubhunting a wood is surrounded and the hunters and riders block off its escape. The fox may turn and fight the lead hound (one or two hounds usually get the fox first). It may also become trapped in thick undergrowth, a hedge, wire fencing or in an outside building. A fox stuck in any of these predicament will have its rear ripped off by the hounds. Any bite from the fox on a hound is called in hunt terminology a 'badge of honour'.
A fox out in the open is usually caught by the lead hound by the tail (which is sometimes torn off) or a rear leg. The fox's instinct is to twist and turn to defend themselves. The hounds avoid the snapping head and attack the rear and belly. Death is by disembowlment and the tearing of skin, muscle and sinew from bone. Another way in which the fox's underside is exposed is if the lead hound knocks the fox over, as the hound is twice the size and weight of a fox. This in hunt terminology is called 'bowled over'.
There is no mention of a 'quick bite on the back of the neck' in historical hunting literature. More importantly no autopsy reports on foxes killed by hunts show any evidence of this. The same goes for pets accidentally killed by the hounds.
The third method of death involves foxes that have escaped but through extreme exhaustion and metabolism trauma will die a slow and lingering death. The Surrey Union recently admitted to chasing the same fox for thirty-five minutes (Horse and Hound 17th Feb 2000).
A switch to drag hunting will avoid death and injury to pets, livestock.
The first move by the Government should bet the immediate suspension of licences to hunt on land owned by the crown, i.e., M.O.D and Forestry Commission land. Other large landowners, i.e., the Church of England, may follow by example.
A time scale of 2 years could be introduced to enable hunts to gradually adjust to drag hunting and re-train hounds.
Grants could be made available and the RSPCA have said that they are willing to help hunts convert. Animal welfare groups would aid in the homing of reject hounds.
Should the potential ban on hunting with dogs finally happen in Scotland we can learn from events north of the border.
A final quote
"Like numerous hunts near London, the difficulties of management were by no means trifling, owing to the many shooting tenants of properties who were luke warm to the preservation of foxes and some of them directly antagonistic."
Quote from - British and Irish hunters and Hunts men Volume III
Mr. Thomas Bennet
Surrey Union hunt master for 10 years
Date uploaded to site 28 March 2000