Nice One David Cameron

[J Darcy 5,871]

Nope I know what I ment and just because they say they've got no permission doesn't make it so, just means their protecting the landowner, no one likes a grass!!!

 

I don't understand what you mean. From where I'm standing, if you have permission then there's no court of law that will be able to convict you for hare coursing as accidents can happen and you may have been flushing to the gun, or rabbiting and a hare got up or setting snares for rabbits or picking up after a hare shoot. All of these answers make it impossible for a prosecution.

So, with this in mind, what scenarios are you refering to?

I can tell you now, that of all the 'coursing' convictions I have known in the last ten years every single one has been not on permission. Except one high profile case, but that was more of a 'test' of the law methinks.

Edited July 9, 2015 by J Darcy

[Rat face 1,655]

 

what happened to all county sports standing together? its a step in the right direction i think

Yes what happened.? Didnt Cameron pledge a vote on Repeal wasnt that what all standing together was based on?not some rear guard action based on a amendment to enable some to benefit from the amendment while others who dont own packs will be in the same position as the day the ban was introduced .

 

i know its not ideal bud but i still think its a starting point, and its somewhere to move forward from

[timmy k 571]

I don't really give a toss to be honest, I never break the law so I'm as kosher as a Jewish lamb, but don't be naive enough to think a hunt never strays and yet no one cares.

[desertbred 5,490]

 

 

 

Who will benefit from the proposed ammendment in the legislation ?

If the amendment goes through anyone can legally flush with an unlimited amount of dogs, be they terriers, lurchers, hounds or pekinese.

 

On permission, they can flush, do the hunts have permission on every land they ride across?

 

It's obvious that you seem somehow bitter toward fellow working dog people, namely people with hounds. Of course, I am not at every hunt, but, for the main, yes, they have permission to flush /drag hunt on the land that they are on. Obviously, the odd occasion hounds get on a scent and that takes them off the permission, like can happen with all our dogs. That isn't intentional, so no law has been broken. What are you getting at?

 

you mean because I wont listen to your bull shit I am bitter? The hunt crosses many lands including my permission and they dont have permission of that landowner personally it doesnot bother mein the slightest but it does the land owner..My bird kills on adjacant land to my permission I am covered because close control of a bird is not possible if my hounds kill then even though intent was not mine who would a magistrate court lean towards me or a wild life officers version of events ?

[J Darcy 5,871]

I don't really give a toss to be honest, I never break the law so I'm as kosher as a Jewish lamb, but don't be naive enough to think a hunt never strays and yet no one cares.

They do care, that's why there's many private prosecutions each year against hunts. That's why they are targeted by months of covert surveliance. Please don't under estimate what they go through to follow their love of working animals. I am not niaive, far from it, I have seen things with my own eyes. And I'm here to tell you, if some of the average working dog owner got the pressure some of the hunt staff get then they'd jack.

[J Darcy 5,871]

 

 

 

 

Who will benefit from the proposed ammendment in the legislation ?

If the amendment goes through anyone can legally flush with an unlimited amount of dogs, be they terriers, lurchers, hounds or pekinese.

 

On permission, they can flush, do the hunts have permission on every land they ride across?

 

It's obvious that you seem somehow bitter toward fellow working dog people, namely people with hounds. Of course, I am not at every hunt, but, for the main, yes, they have permission to flush /drag hunt on the land that they are on. Obviously, the odd occasion hounds get on a scent and that takes them off the permission, like can happen with all our dogs. That isn't intentional, so no law has been broken. What are you getting at?

 

you mean because I wont listen to your bull shit I am bitter? The hunt crosses many lands including my permission and they dont have permission of that landowner personally it doesnot bother mein the slightest but it does the land owner..My bird kills on adjacant land to my permission I am covered because close control of a bird is not possible if my hounds kill then even though intent was not mine who would a magistrate court lean towards me or a wild life officers version of events ?

 

I can't answer specific situations can I. I am only giving my opinion. I do not know how the police are going to go, I do not have control over their minds. I'm ever so sorry about that.

 

 

Together we stand..................

[timmy k 571]

Together we stand......... And all below middle class can go f**k themselves, or at least I think that's how the saying goes.

[Rat face 1,655]

Together we stand......... And all below middle class can go f**k themselves, or at least I think that's how the saying goes.

not all hunts are in red coats and ride horses buddy

[desertbred 5,490]

I also am just expressing my opinions and raising scenarios and questions that as yet are not answered. I support every kind of sporting activity the ones involving dogs are particular favourites of mine , the issue I am having a problem with is who decided to support the amendment on behalf of country activity participants without open and full consultation of all not just club or organisation members?

[myersbg 1,355]

Most of the people that have been convicted under the hunt ban were all caught poaching, running hares on somebody else's land without permission.

I don't feel that this amendment will even get passed,i hope i am wrong,but if this doesn't get through then a repeal has a snow flakes chance in hell of getting through, look at it as a start of turning things around and not a stab in the back.

Sticking together we have half a chance, divided we are FKD.

 

Brian

[timmy k 571]

I know that but who's on the front page of every paper when huntings mentioned? Not some rag arse with a bobbery pack of hounds. Who's most likely to benefit from a relaxed hunting bill? Obviously the nations elite

[desertbred 5,490]

You cant have permission from a landowner to break the Law That is why lads even with permission to rabbit if they fall foul of the law because of accidents they choose the trespass option as it saves time expense and a possible 5 grand fine for a landowner

[Bo Duke 420]

This amendment as I understand it is for the benefit of game keepers, farmers, pest controllers, huntsman etc it will allow them to use as many hounds/dogs as necessary to flush to guns. There will still be a free vote on the repeal as promised when the time is right and if that goes in your favour the hunting act will be scrapped in its entirety, I think you're lucky to have a generally pro hunting party at the helm and it's certainly the best chance you have.

[bird 9,599]

This amendment as I understand it is for the benefit of game keepers, farmers, pest controllers, huntsman etc it will allow them to use as many hounds/dogs as necessary to flush to guns. There will still be a free vote on the repeal as promised when the time is right and if that goes in your favour the hunting act will be scrapped in its entirety, I think you're lucky to have a generally pro hunting party at the helm and it's certainly the best chance you have.

 

yeh prob the best chance you will get, but think the votes will go against it at the time, joe public don't want it back and the mps wont upset the apple cart as they say.

[Bozzy 12]

Thay take the piss lads it was all just a promis just to get r votes money grabing twats all of them!!!