LEGAL COURSING/ HOW?

[mole catcher 1]

PART ONE, Please read both parts

 

Befor i start i want to say that i am in no way a solicitor or in any way studying law so this is just my thoughts on what i see to be a loop hole in the law as it stands regarding hare coursing.

The hunting act states: A person commits an offence if he hunts a wild mammel with a dog unless his hunting is EXEMPT.it then goes on to explain: EXEMPT HUNTING: hunting is exempt if it is within a class specified in schedule1.Forward to schedule 1. STALKING AND FLUSHING OUT.(1) stalking a wild mammel or flushing it out of cover is exempt hunting if the conditions below are satisfied(2) The first condition is that the stalking isor flushing out is undertaken for the purpose of A, preventing or reducing serious damage which the wild mammel would otherwise causeto livestock,gamebirds or wildbirds(within the meaning of section 27 of the wildlife and countryside act) to food for live stock, to crops, to growing timber, to fisheries, to other property ot to the biological diversity of an area.B, obtaining meat to be used for human or animal consumption or NOW THIS IS THE BIG ONE THAT I FEEL IS THE LOOP HOLE, PARTICIPATION IN A FIELD TRIAL.The act then goes on to explain that,, In sub paragraph (2c) a field trial meens a compertition(other than hare coursing) in which dogs A, flush animals out of cover or retrieve animals that have been shot (or both) and B, are assesed as to their likely usefullnes in conection with shootingThe second condition is that the stalking or flushing takes place on land that A, belongs to the person doing it B,or by a person who has been given(written) permission by either the ocupier or in cases of land un-ocupied by the person whom it belongs to.The third condition is that flushing and stalking doesnt envolve more than 2 dogs. Fourth condition is that it doesnt envolve a dog below ground, fifth condition is A, reasonable steps are taken to ensure that as soon as possible after being found or flushed the wild mammel is shot by a compitant person and B, each dog is used is kept under control and doesnt prevent A(above) from happening.

After close reading of the above more than once it became clear to me that what i wittnessed back in november was well within the hunting act as it stands at this moment in time. SORRY FOR BEING LONG WINDED BUT PLEASE READ PART TWO ( when ive typed it up )

Edited March 9, 2007 by mole catcher

[mole catcher 1]

PART ONE, Please read both parts

 

56 have read this first part but 158 have read the 2nd part, strange that