Foxhunting with packs of hounds kinder than two dog rule
Country pursuits lobby calls for law amendment as new evidence emerges
THE first scientific study into the use of dogs to hunt foxes has found that the law banning hunting makes controlling foxes “‘less effective and more cruel”’.
The study says the law in England and Wales has led to a longer pursuit of foxes by farmers trying to control them on their land. It suggests that Scottish law, which allows the use of any number of dogs to flush and shoot foxes, is more effective and less cruel. In England and Wales only two dogs can be used.
The study, published in the Wildlife Society Bulletin, finds the use of just two dogs rather than a pack results in only half as many foxes being flushed and takes much longer.
Dr Jeremy Naylor, an equine vet and former senior lecturer at Bristol University and one of the authors of the report, said the decision to restrict to two dogs in England and Wales “seems to have been plucked out of the air”.
He added: “We are making no welfare claims in our study but we are providing data which may inform the welfare argument. In the Burns Inquiry report they considered one factor that might effectively compromise welfare is duration of active pursuit.
“Our data quite clearly indicated that a pack of hounds is considerably more effective at flushing in a considerably shorter duration.”
The study was commissioned by the Federation of Welsh Farmers’ Packs (FWFP), which represents hunts and clubs which tradi- tionally used packs of hounds to flush and shoot foxes to protect sheep and other livestock.
David Thomas, secretary of the FWFP, said: “The law as it stands in England and Wales is completely indefensible. Farmers’ packs were developed for the sole purpose of controlling foxes to limit the predation of lambs using the only practical method in a mountainous region with huge expanses of commercial forestry.
“The limit of two dogs was plucked out of nowhere. There is no evidence or logical justification for it. Antihunting organisations have even admitted that pairs of dogs are utterly useless in flushing to guns.”
He added: “It is simply not acceptable that farmers are unable to protect their flocks. This study empha-
‘The two dog limit was plucked from nowhere. There is no justification for it’
sises once again why the law needs to change”. The Government proposed an amendment to the Hunting Act in 2015 to bring the law into line with Scotland but it was withdrawn when SNP MPs indicated they would oppose the amendment.
Tim Bonner, chief executive of the Countryside Alliance, which supports the FWFP’s call for a change in the law, said: “We are in a ridiculous situation where everyone knows the law has failed, there is peer reviewed science which proves that it is inefficient and yet political prejudice continues to block change.
“The arguments against hunting have always been illogical, but opposition to this amendment is now an indisputable rejection of science and evidence.”