This remains a highly emotive issue and I appreciate the depth of your concerns for the welfare of our animals and wildlife.
The Hunting Act 2004 makes it an offence to hunt a wild mammal with dogs except where it is carried out in accordance with the exemptions in the Act, and completely bans hare coursing. Enforcement of the Hunting Act is an operational matter for the police. It is for individual Chief Constables to determine how their resources are deployed, and it is for locally elected Police and Crime Commissioners to hold their forces to account. This includes consideration of how the police tackle crimes that matter most to the residents and businesses who live in rural and urban areas alike.
Since the introduction of the Act, many hunting organisations across the country have worked hard to adapt their activities towards trail hunting. This involves a pack of hounds following an artificially laid, animal-based scent so does not involve a hunt for a live fox, and therefore is not banned. Our countryside makes up over 90 per cent of our land and adds over £250 billion to our economy in England alone, which is thanks to the hard work and dedication of the nearly 10 million people who call this their home. For many living in rural areas, trail hunting is a way of retaining long-held traditions, as part of the fabric of rural life, which they can enjoy in full compliance with the law. I understand their concerns that banning trail hunting would have far reaching consequences on the rural economy and on rural communities which may not be fully appreciated.
For an offence to be committed it is necessary to prove that a wild animal is being hunted intentionally. On the rare occasion when dogs used for trail hunting may pick up and follow the scent of live foxes, it is the responsibility of the huntsmen and women and other members of the hunt staff to control their hounds and, if necessary, stop the hounds as soon as they are made aware that the hounds are no longer following the trail that has been laid. Failure to prevent dogs from chasing or killing a fox may be taken as intent to break the law. Anyone who believes that an offence has taken place should report the matter to the police, as the police deal with complaints of illegal hunting.
If proven, this can lead to a prosecution and an unlimited fine. In cases where hunt or hunt personnel are proven to have carried out illegal activity, I understand that licence withdrawal would be considered. Decisions on the arrest and prosecution of those taking part in illegal hunting activities are matters for the police and prosecuting authorities. They will, among other things, need to take into account any failure on behalf of the huntsman to prevent the dogs from chasing or killing a fox. The investigation and prosecution of all criminal offences, including consideration of whether an actual offence has been committed, is a matter for the police and Crown Prosecution Service, who have comprehensive powers to take action under criminal law.
If anybody is found to be breaking the law on this sort of activity, I would fully welcome prosecutions being brought.
Equally, regarding hunt saboteurs, while it is a long-standing tradition in this country that people are free to gather and demonstrate their views, they must do so within the law. Therefore, I agree the Government should support local police forces in stopping criminal activity by these individuals and groups, and where it occurs, the perpetrators should be held to account.
Finally, having looked into this, I understand that there is no policy allowing wildlife hunting on Ministry of Defence (MOD) land. Indeed, hunting is illegal on MOD land under the Hunting Act 2004. To hunt on MOD land, an organisation must have a recognised governing body and all persons participating in a hunt must also be members of such an organisation. The organisation must also hold an MOD-issued licence. These license’s terms clearly state that only trail hunting, carried out in accordance with the Hunting Act’s provisions, are permitted.
