CA: A step Further

[T.F.Student 0]

A nail in the coffin of the anti-hunt movement

 

Many of you will remember the protracted campaign by animal rights groups to persuade the National Trust to prohibit hunting on its land from the 1980s onwards which eventually led to a ban on deer hunting. Responding to that decision in 1997 the League Against Cruel Sports (LACS) said: “We believe this is a very big nail in the coffin of huntingâ€.

 

By that measure the failure, on Saturday, of LACS to overturn the decision of the National Trust to allow exempt hunting of deer on National Trust land must rate as a ‘nail in the coffin of the anti-hunt movement’.

 

The membership of the National Trust voted overwhelmingly by ballot, and even more decisively at the Trust’s AGM on Saturday, to reject a motion by LACS Chief Executive Douglas Batchelor calling for a ban on the use of all dogs in the management of deer on National Trust land.

 

The AGM heard the Trust oppose the resolution and put the case for the new policy of allowing the use of dogs, including hounds, to help find sick and injured deer. Speakers from the floor criticised the proponents of the motion for using the AGM as a political platform and risking the welfare of deer. Lewis Thomas of the Veterinary Association of Wildlife Management summed up the mood of the meeting when he said: “to deny such animals (injured deer) a humane and rapid death because of this resolution is quite frankly a disgraceâ€.

 

The significance of the vote goes far beyond the few occasions when it might be relevant to the Devon and Somerset Staghounds. It hits at the heart of the anti-hunt movement because the Trust has now accepted that on occasions: “the welfare of a sick or injured deer may best be served by allowing members of the hunt to locate and dispatch the animalâ€. In other words that hunting can be the most humane method of control. And if hunting can be the most humane method of control then logically its almost complete prohibition, through the Hunting Act, must actually have increased suffering.

 

The tide has turned on the hunting debate and the arguments for a ban on animal welfare and public opinion grounds have been demolished. The political campaigns of the '80s and '90s may have made the eventual passing of the Hunting Act inevitable, but the increasing evidence of its failure makes its repeal even more so.

 

The total vote including the postal vote was:

12,768 in favour of the resolution

20,182 against

 

The opposition to the LACS motion was co-ordinated by Friends Of the National Trust (FONT). FONT wishes to thank all those NT members who troubled to go to Cheltenham to demonstrate their views by voting so emphatically to defeat the LACS resolution by at least 10:1 in the Hall and also those who voted by post. Your efforts made it a good day for animal welfare. Any Trust members who want FONT to assist them through the complexities of the NT voting arrangements next year should send their email address to: fontgroup@gmail.com

 

Simon Hart

[mole catcher 1]

when you have people like those involved with this vote speaking out as they have, it makes me wonder how on earth did the ban gain such momentum in the first place? I feel that the tide of anti hunt feeling is now on the turn,ok we wont see any change instantly but you can see the underlying tones of what is hopefully going to come in the future. It warms the hunting soul when such a large body as the national trust,which lets face it is about as close to those who manage this countryside as you can get, openly through their members and the voice of people's such as vets state that it is not in the interests of animal wellfare to let things stay as they are.

Now lets for one moment look at the larger picture. what would happen if for arguments sake, that through this decision to allow exempt hunting that it was over time proved, that retuning to a pre ban way of doing things was in fact the best way in the first place,regarding deer managment? Could this been seen by all us hunters, regardless of quarry that indeed there is now proof on a large scale(how large is the national trust?) that when all is said and done,hunting as a meens of controling healthy numbers within a spacies does work?