CAMPAIGNERS ACCUSE HUNTSMAN OF CHASING FOXES IN BREACH OF LAW

Steven Morris
The Guardian

The first case to test the government's controversial ban on hunting began yesterday when a professional huntsman went on trial accused of letting his hounds chase and allegedly kill a fox following a pursuit across open moorland.

The prosecution of Tony Wright, which is being heard amid tight security by a district judge at Barnstaple in north Devon, is being watched closely by pro-hunt supporters and animal rights groups. If it succeeds other cases may follow and hunts may have to re-examine their practices.

Since the ban on hunting with dogs in England and Wales came into force last year, hunts have continued, and in some cases become even more popular, often using exemptions which are specified in the legislation.

But the League Against Cruel Sports, which is bringing the private prosecution, claims Mr Wright "cynically" used the exemptions to lead an event which "bore all the hallmarks of a traditional hunt".

Mr Wright, 52, who has been a hunt professional all his life, denies breaching the Hunting Act 2004. He claims the foxes were being flushed out to a gun person by a pair of dogs, which is allowed under the act in some circumstances.

The disputed hunt took place on a bright spring Friday in April last year. Dozens of hunt supporters turned up, some intending to follow on horseback or foot and some to observe from their vehicles. Also there were Ed Shephard and Graham Floyd, employees of the League Against Cruel Sports. Armed with two digital video cameras with telescopic lenses and a handheld global satellite positioning system accurate to 10 metres, the pair set about recording the day's hunting.

A video film shot by Mr Shephard, which forms the basis of the prosecution, was shown in court. It begins with the hunt supporters gathering.

In his scarlet hunting jacket and mounted on a white horse, Mr Wright stands out clearly. The film also shows a man on a quad bike with a rifle bag slung over his shoulder; on the front of his machine is a spade and on the back a box for transporting terriers.

The hunt sets out and by about 12.15pm two foxhounds are seen pursing a fox across the barren moorland of the Exe plain. Shortly afterwards, the prosecution claimed, a hunt follower gave a thumbs-up sign to the monitors and said: "1-0", implying a fox had been killed. The film shows a second fox being chased downhill an hour later through heather and grass by the two hounds, with Mr Wright and the rest of the field following on. Mr Wright blows a series of blasts on his horn, a call which the prosecution claimed was designed to encourage the hounds on.
Mr Shephard told the court the second fox was chased for three minutes, in which time it covered at least a kilometre.

The film ends with Mr Wright calling the hounds home at about 1.45pm, and the hunt breaks up.

Richard Furlong, prosecuting, told the court the foxes were being neither stalked nor flushed out of cover, techniques which are allowed in some circumstances. He said: "What in fact happened was a prolonged period of pursuit of the foxes by the hounds."

Mr Furlong claimed no attempt was made to shoot the foxes dead as soon as possible, another requirement. The man on the quad bike was not seen by the monitors to produce a weapon and at times was a kilometre from the dogs. He was a "token gesture", said Mr Furlong.
The prosecution also claimed the hounds were not kept under sufficiently close control by Mr Wright to make sure they did not get in the way of a clean shot - another requirement of the act.
Mr Furlong alleged that the fact that the hunt had terriers with it was also a "problem" for the huntsman. "They were there for a purpose," he said. The "icing on the cake" was the fact that while the second fox was being pursued, Mr Wright encouraged the hounds to carry on chasing it by giving "staccato" blasts on his horn.

Mr Furlong said: "Mr Wright's conduct indicates ... a cynical attempt to pay lip service to legislation by having one man on a quad bike present with a gun bag, by using no more than two hounds and by having the terriers hidden in a box.

"The object of the meet on that day ... was for Mr Wright to provide a traditional spectacle. We say it does violence to common sense to argue that Mr Wright and the hunt followers were engaged in a shooting exercise. They were engaged in a hunting exercise."A report of the hunt in the local paper placed by Mr Wright said the hounds "were able to produce a long, fast and successful day". Mr Furlong said: "A long day is the antithesis of what is required by the act: that the foxes should be shot as soon as possible after being found or flushed out."

The hearing continues.

Read More Here