Hunting and this growing ignorance of ill-informed animal rights protesters

Hunting with hounds continues to divide political and public opinion.

IF you had never visited the countryside and simply read about the carnage, rioting and criminality in rural areas, as described by Miss K Watson (The Yorkshire Post, February 24), it would be totally understandable if you avoided ever going there in the future.

Close loopholes in the Hunting Act and end this barbarity - Yorkshire Post lette...

Thankfully, that exaggerated and false description is nowhere near reality, but it is how some animal rightists like to spread their propaganda about hunting with hounds.

Hunting with hounds remains a controversial topic.

Just days after the Hunting Act came into force on February 18, 2005, claims of illegal hunting were made. Some people had mistakenly thought that the whole activity of hunting with hounds was now banned and that they would never see such scenes again, which is surprising given that it was anti-hunting groups and politicians opposed to hunting who drafted the law.

At the time of its passing, the Hunting Act was hailed as sound legislation, allowing for the use of hounds in certain circumstances including hunting a trail laid by a human.

As one of four former executive directors of the League Against Cruel Sports whose views changed as we learned more about hunting (and the alternatives), I am confident in saying this law has been a disaster for the species that were previously hunted.

The fox population nationally is thought to have dropped by about one third, the Red deer herds on Exmoor are slowly deteriorating due to disease and other factors; as a direct result of the Hunting Act, tens of thousands of hares were shot out. If anyone thinks the Hunting Act has been good for animal welfare, they had better think again.

The real problem with this law is that it was brought in on the back of ignorant animal rights thinking. Having sat through every committee stage of the Hunting Act as it passed through Parliament, I was utterly dismayed at the lack of knowledge of wildlife management, of the process of hunting with hounds and what would fill its place if removed, as well as the sheer bigotry of some politicians disguising their campaign as something good for animal welfare.

Ardent anti-hunters will always see illegal hunting at every turn.

It raises the question why, when there are so many claims of law-breaking, is this not reflected in successful prosecutions? Another question that must be be asked of anti-hunting groups is what methods of wildlife management they support?