So after the revelations of the Kimblewick throwing a fox in front of the hounds story I covered last week and our little visit to them over the weekend it was interesting to note the amount of public feeling arising from this issue.

Our Facebook page receives lots of messages from the general public and those regarding the Kimblewick are probably more common than most. This hunt, like most, certainly seem to believe they are above not only the law but are happy to bully and harass the public and make it known they will do whatever they want regardless of public feeling. It was quite interesting to note that they are certainly not getting everything their own way and local people are starting to speak up against them.

We always advise people to call the police on 101 and report illegal hunting if they believe it to be taking place and we received several reports of the hunt out again yesterday (14/01/19 – don’t these people have proper jobs?) and they were in fact reporting this to the police.

Thames Valley Police (Aylesbury Vale) then felt it necessary to publish a post on their own social media page with some information. It’s quite long but worth reading so here’s a screen shot for you:

tvp1

What I’m going to do is break down the statement and highlight what they’ve got right and indeed wrong.

The first paragraph is all pretty standard stuff and I doubt there will be any real questions asked. What I will say is I’ve dealt with TVP several times in the past and they haven’t exactly left me feeling confident in their understanding of the law or indeed their willingness to uphold it in terms of wildlife legislation. While probably not the same officer a Wildlife Crime Officer from TVP did think it was legal to dig out and kill a fox from a badger sett a couple of seasons ago, something I witnessed while undercover monitoring of the Bicester with Whaddon Chase Hunt.

Point 1 – No argument here although the description of Trail Hunting seems to accept this is a “sport”. For a sport there has to be at least 2 sides which compete against each other. Not sure this really applies.

Point 2 – I love this one “…ask to speak to someone in charge”. Let’s face it if the hunt are chasing a fox they’re hardly likely to stop for you and answer your questions, in fact all the complaints we have is about the threatening nature of the hunt and their arrogance in dealing with the public. They have no qualms about hunting through private land and will generally ride roughshod over all and sundry. This is a totally unrealistic statement and quite frankly laughable.

Apparently the hunt will have also told the police they are out (well isn’t that nice) just so the police can probably ignore all the calls from the public and pretend they haven’t seen all those illegally ridden quad bikes.

quad

TVP ignoring the illegal quad on the road.

TVP have also stated they have some sort of working relationship with the Master of Hounds (how very cosy) who will insure there’s no unlawful “execution” of foxes. Execution? What the hell this? Execution is a term used for punishment. This is very odd wording to say the least. And is there a lawful execution of foxes and how the hell do we decide that?

Point 3 – The difference between Drag and Trail Hunting. So they’ve got this mostly right but what they fail to do here (and they’re still calling it a hound sport) is highlight the fact that trail hunting is a new activity designed to simulate real fox hunting and it’s a fox scent that they use, although don’t ask where they get that from. We all know it’s just an alibi for real hunting but I’m not going to go over all that again.

trail

The Kimblewick trail layer. A dry duster flopping about in the air and behind the hounds isn’t really going to work now is it.

Point 4 – Yes, live species do naturally live out in the open (no shit Sherlock) and the hounds are almost certainly going to pick up the scent of a fox if you put them in an area they are likely to inhabit. The fact is the hunters want this and they are sure hell not going to stop the hounds once they get on to one. But this is the big one:

“The accidental killing of a fox is not illegal”.

Well there you go then boys and girls, off you pop and kill as many foxes as you like. As long as you make it look like an “accident” you’re all good. We’ve got your backs. It’s nice they also perpetuate the tradition argument to make it sound all nice and socially acceptable. Tradition never was, and never will be, an excuse for cruelty and law breaking.

TVP’s explanation of the hounds on a scent also leaves a lot to be desired. It’s almost amusing to assume the public will believe the hounds are in distress. Anyone who’s witnessed hounds on full cry will see the very singular and focused nature of the hounds and their desire to catch their quarry. It can be quite a bone chilling sound.

Their understanding of the use of a horn is once again completely inaccurate. Only one person uses a horn during a hunt, and that’s the huntsman. The purpose of the horn is a method of communication between the huntsman and the hounds. There are several calls the huntsman can make with the most important being to hunt on or to stop. You’ll often hear the former when they are in cry (called doubling) but very rarely the latter. And again this is nothing to do with just “tradition”, what total nonsense.

Fox hunting does indeed remain a controversial subject, not just between hunters and animal rights advocates but the wider general public, mainly because they’re fed up with the lack of policing and the continued abuse of our wildlife carried out by a minority group who it would appear are above the law. And let’s just remind TVP this is the same hunt which was filmed throwing a trapped fox in front of hounds for them to hunt. How is that investigation going by the way?

If TVP want to get in touch you can find me easily enough. I’m happy to educate your officers on the reality of “trail hunting”.

Make your feelings know.

Thames Valley Police (Aylesbury Vale) Facebook Page

TVP Police and Crime Commissioner

TVP Chief Constable.

 

ADDITIONAL

Just look at the different approach TVP have towards hare coursing, the same legislation applies.

tvp.png

Comments
  1. James says:

    “Hunting remains a controversial subject” is a stock line thrown out by police and politicians alike who don’t want to risk offending people.

    It’s not controversial, it’s illegal.

    “Robbery remains a controversial subject”, you never hear that…

  2. Alison Lawlor says:

    Shocking TVP…. 🙄

  3. It is so easy for these sadists to pretend that they are only Drag or Trail hunting and, therefore, all hunting involving the use of hounds must be made illegal as it is inevitable that many foxes and other animals will be torn to bits to satisfy the lust of these people. Whether any animal is killed for the delight of these vile people or by accident is not the point; the important point being that any form of hunting will inevitably destroy sentient lives on so many occasions.

  4. Terence Dite. says:

    What a load of propaganda based crap that was. The police, judiciary and the whole establishment is sucking up to the people WITH MONEY. No longer can we trust the police to uphold the law, impartially. The days when most non-criminally minded people TRUSTED and REVERED the police and judiciary are long gone, and unlikely ever to return.
    I am an 84 year old ex-serviceman; worked all my life to pay my way, and like so many other citizens of this once wonderful nation, I am THOROUGHLY DISGUSTED with the way this country is being run today. I am no longer concerned that my time on earth is coming to its end.

  5. john roche says:

    The police have lost all trust and respect in the way they they respond to illegal hunting. If hunters don’t want to “accidentally” hurt foxes why don’t the muzzle the hounds?

    • Muzzling hounds isn’t the solution. They would still chase animals to exhaustion and many would still die of stress related injuries afterwards similar to the hares which are used in coursing in Ireland.

  6. Pat Murgatroyd says:

    My brain is tired of hearing the utter crap given out by hunt scum and the utterly bigoted police.

  7. Hunt Monitor says:

    If the reports they received were, as stated, of hunting in the Long Crendon area, that would have been the Bicester Hunt. The bottom line is there is NO SUCH THING as trail hunting. Never give it a moment’s credence. The hunts don’t have accidents, they don’t have manufactured accidents, they just foxhunt, and wheel out the old falsehood about “we were trail hunting and the hounds went after a fox blah blah blah” every time they get caught, So the issue of laying an “animal based scent” is another falsehood designed to confuse – they don’t lay ANY scent because they don’t “trail hunt”!! The post by the police looks as though it was in fact written by the Countryside Alliance.

  8. Reading between the lines, this police statement is clearly designed to discourage people from reporting illegal hunting by suggesting it is almost certainly, in their view, innocent ‘trail hunting’ and they are highly unlikely to devote much, if any effort, to investigating it. That not only saves them from having to ask high socio-economic status people difficult questions [never mind the prospect of arresting them], but also an awful lot of work trying to enforce a law under which they face a vanishingly small chance of a conviction, one which, even if obtained, will have virtually no deterrent effect. Some of their post is, in my view, knowingly and intentionally misleading.
    This is the same police force which, over a few years, failed to action dozens of reports, backed by strong and highly knowledgeable witness and video evidence, from POWA colleagues of mine. In despair they turned to the RSPCA. Their lawyers’ view, having examined their footage from the 2011/12 season, was that no fewer than 52 illegal hunting cases could be brought with a better than even chance of conviction. It ended, of course, in December 2012, with an RSPCA prosecution resulting in the Hunt itself, a former Huntsman and a former Master pleading guilty to 12 charges, with 28 left to lie on file. And, of course, a not entirely unbiased judge speaking wholly out of turn in criticising the RSPCA for spending so much on the prosecution, followed by a relentless campaign of bullying of the RSPCA which succeeded in persuaded them into stopping Hunting Act prosecutions. Even though the ex Chief Inspector of the CPS, who the Society had asked to review their policy, told
    them that the law on hunting was being ‘ extensively flouted’..Well, not according to TVP it’s not. There’s none so blind as well as those who will not see.

  9. sam stevens says:

    Hi I know your very good at looking into things and here is a good one for you to do in your not so free time. When you look into it you will find that Mr Daniel’s is the head of the Portman hunt and the head of a company in GCHQ Ripjar I will let you see what they do but it makes you wonder.

    Sam

    https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/officers/Oyoh0qa_YFkxrQbv5K3seN8TuL8/appointments

    Sent from my iPad

  10. Catherine Deering says:

    I am not at all sure it is correct to say: “The heritage and traditions of hunting remain very much the same since hunting started in the 1800s.”

    This assertion is comprehensively challenged in “The Origins of English Fox Hunting and the Myth of Hugo Meynell and the Quorn” by Iris M Middleton, Sport in History, 01 April 2005, Vol.25(1), p.1-16.

    Here is the abstract:

    Many people who hunt today, and some prominent fox hunting historians hold the opinion that fox hunting as practised now began in the late eighteenth century, and that Hugo Meynell of the Quorn Hunt in Leicestershire devised this method. There is much printed evidence from medieval and later sources to show that fox hunting was carried out at least from the early fourteenth century and that it was conducted in the same manner as it is now. It certainly became more popular in the eighteenth century as more men acquired enough money to be able to afford leisure pursuits. Hugo Meynell’s hunt was at best, very fashionable, but no evidence exists to indicate its excellence, and only after he had died was he singled out as the best ever fox hunter by Charles Apperley, who made his living by writing about hunts and hunting personalities. Although Apperley never saw Meynell or his hounds, the reputation that Meynell acquired from Apperley still exists. This article proposes that Meynell’s reputation is a myth and that fox hunting continued as it began, a medieval practice.

    Any library should be able to obtain full text from the British Library, although they may make a charge for this.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s