Archive for the ‘Response’ Category

Now I promise you I have no obsession with the Fitzwilliam Hunt. They are just another bunch of wildlife abusers who happen to be fairly local and who we’ve gathered enough evidence on to take to court. However they do keep giving me plenty of material to write about and while this continues I’ll counter their lies with the truth and show them up for what they really are.

Here’s their latest post on their Facebook page.

Fitz.png

1 – “The landowners gave us permission to cross their land”. That kind of sounds like they just went through the grounds of Burghley House, like crossing a river over a bridge, merely going from A to B. This was not the case. The meet was in the grounds itself and they spent over 2 hours within the grounds boundary openly drawing every piece of woodland they could put the hounds through, starting on the west side before covering the large area of woodland to the South and east. They even drew a reed bed next the lake in the grounds. During this time they flushed a hare which serial wildlife abuser John Mease couldn’t resist releasing his eagle on and this animal was killed. While this in itself is not illegal it certainly wasn’t the aims of the hunt and puts into question his purpose on the day. Hares are also in huge decline at the moment and need more protection but these people care not about such matters.

The hunt also spent several hours outside the park to the south-east openly hunting, although by this stage much of the field had gone home.

Burgley house

Burghley House & Park.

2 – “We engaged in a variety of legal forms of hunting, including laid trails for the hounds to follow”.  Does anyone really believe this nonsense? We had them under observation ALL day. Not once did we witness any trails being laid and the hounds were being put through areas of undergrowth where no trail layer could ever have gone (thick woodland and reed beds). It was abundantly clear to all except the blind and terminally idiotic they were illegally hunting. And if they were following a trail what was the purpose of the masked up terrier men on quads?

Terriemen

Fitzwilliam terrier men – no purpose on a trail hunt

3 – Whilst undertaking this legal activity, there was sadly repeated trespass and harassment by hunt saboteurs who also endangered both hounds and people by interfering with hounds and calling them away from the control of the huntsman”. So, we’ve already established it wasn’t a legal activity so that’s done with and as I’ve stated in previous posts trespass is a civil offence and hunting is criminal, you can trespass on private land to prevent this crime from taking place. It should also be noted that the park grounds themselves are open to the public so it was in fact impossible to trespass here, something the hunt once again failed to note. There never was any harassment either, we simply follow the hunt, predict their movements and be ready in place to intervene should we be required to. If there was any harassment taking place it came from the jokers who were assigned to us by the hunt to act as minders.

2

One of our “minders” – not the sharpest tool in the box.

The statement is also a bit of a slap in the face for their huntsman, Simon Hunter. If a bunch of sabs can so easily take the hounds away from his control what does that say about his abilities as a professional huntsman? Doesn’t sound like he’s up to the job, perhaps they should sack him and get someone else in. There never was any danger to either people or hounds, except of course when Simon let the hounds riot on some of the many deer in the area. He lost the pack all on his own. In fact we retrieved several lost hounds and bought them back to him but this of course wasn’t mentioned in the FB post, funny that. Once more, this is an utter fabrication with a single purpose, to make the best of a bad day and save face. Remember this is the same hunt who lost control of their hounds and caused havoc through the village of Upwood, much to the annoyance of the locals.

SH.png

Simon Hunter with the hounds under control for once.

4 – Sadly we had to ask the police to attend due to this dangerous, unlawful and irresponsible behaviour by the saboteurs. We always encourage hunts to call the police. They can then explain what they are up to. It also tends to keep all the hunt thugs in order. So what happened then, did multiple units turn up and arrest every sab in sight?

Nope.

A couple of bored looking units arrived, clearly they had learnt their lesson from previous encounters and are now aware of the lies told by the Fitzwilliam and are refusing to act as their private security force. They smiled and waved at us as we drove past and made no arrests.

5 – “All hounds were safely returned to the huntsman despite the saboteurs efforts to prevent this”. The hounds weren’t returned by anyone. The simple fact is the Whipper-in probably spent hours galloping round the countryside trying to retrieve hounds which had run off after some of the local wildlife. Some hounds would have found their way back on their own. Despite these outrageous claims we always want the best for the animals and although the hounds often look half-starved and covered in scars and growths the only option is back with the pack. Hunts will often make this claim in an attempt to turn the argument into a class war type thing and paint sabs as just trouble makers with no respect for animals but once again this is just a whole pile of steaming horse shit.

The statement as a whole is nothing more than a very poor attempt to put a positive spin on a day that was a complete disaster for them on what was supposed to be a prestigious meet. They set out 2 hours early in an effort to avoid our attentions and yet we still found them. The simple fact is they are being spotted by the general public and they are in turn letting us know their movements. We have eyes and ears everywhere and the hunts are universally disliked. Their days are numbered.

If you’ve been keeping up with developments you’d have read my blog entry from last week that was in response to a statement the Fitzwilliam Hunt put out. Well interestingly they’ve responded and this made me very happy indeed.

Firstly thanks for the extra hits guys, I really appreciated it. It’s nice to know my blog is being read by both sides.

Secondly (and most amusingly) they’ve chosen to respond regarding the use of Citronella. Now my original blog post highlighted many issues regarding the illegal activities of the Fitzwilliam. The questionable use of a Bird of Prey, the presence of terrier men, the blocking up of Badger setts, the legality of trespass and access to private land and the laying of non-existent trails. Are we then to assume that they have conceded on all the above points I raised as truth, and they have nothing else as a counter argument? I wonder if they will issue another statement? Do you think they will hire a lawyer (they can certainly afford one) or get another deluded and indoctrinated teenager to write a heartfelt but ultimately nonsensical response?

There statement on the use of Citronella can be seen below.

Citronella.png

It’s fairly clear they gave someone the job of doing a bit of research on citronella and they’ve quoted chapter and verse from the data sheet. However this has backfired on them in a pretty significant way. The response from the fabulous British general public was spectacular.

Response 1.png

So OK for use on children. Good to know.

Response 2.png

Some nice science there. I like science.

Response 3.png

Everything carries a potential hazard notice. It clears the manufacturers of any possible claims in the unlikely event of any reaction.

Response 4

I agree, not even neat Citronella can cover their desperation.

Response 5

Embarrassing indeed.

The above comments as only a small selection of the responses, the vast majority anti-hunt, factual and highly critical. If hunting is to survive it needs to take a long hard look at itself. Stop hunting live quarry, adopt the clean boot or drag, show some respect to other people and their  property and get with the times. Its a tiny minority pastime and the British public are deeply ashamed of what you do and what you represent. This archaic tradition is no excuse for cruelty, it’s time to adapt or go the way of the Dodo.

Today’s announcement by the Secretary of State for the Environment regarding the future policy on the control of Bovine TB was eagerly awaited by the members of the house and wildlife groups throughout the country. However it was fairly early on in his speech that the tone and standard script of contextually misleading data carefully interwoven with downright lies and twisted propaganda was clearly not going to contain the outcome anyone with a sense of right and wrong or compassion for our native wildlife were hoping for. In spite of the overwhelming scientific evidence, the democratic will of the house and the now released damming report from the IEP the Government were once again kowtowing to their masters in the NFU and forging ahead with repeated culls in Somerset and Gloucestershire. The only good news being further roll-outs across the country had been postponed while the cull companies perfect their killing methodology.

Shadow Environment Secretary Maria Eagle ripped into Paterson;

“There is no strategy here, this is an unscientific fudge for you to try and save face.”

“How can you possibly justify continuing a method of killing, free shooting, which has been found to be inhumane by the independent scientific advisors?”

“You ignore scientific evidence, make a decision based on your own prejudice and then offer retrospectively to tell me and others what the policy is and expect us to agree with you.”

“These culls should be ended not extended, they have not worked. What you have announced now is an open season on badgers in the culling areas.”

We can only hope a legal challenge by the Badger Trust via Judicial Review puts a stop to any future culling however a reliable source has indicated there may be another stumbling block. The NFU seem to want to have their cake and eat it. They’re very keen to keep killing our wildlife but are very reluctant to pick up the tab and in light of the IEP report cage trapping could to be the only method allowed. These factors could prove significant. The population at large will not stand for more of their tax pounds being wasted on such a bloodthirsty folly and cages are relatively easy to find, quite expensive (£180 per trap) and easily neutralized by activists. I’ll be publishing details on how to achieve that outcome in due course.

However in the mean time we have to assume the worst and once again prepare for action. Friends of wildlife and Badgers are unifying. If the NFU and pro cull farmers think the situation was bad for them previously then I say to them “you aint seen nothing yet!” We are now more organised, better prepared and our numbers increasing all the time. We’ll make you pay a cost so high for every Badger killed it’ll make the £4000 from last time seem like small change.

Now is the time to stand up and be counted. Apathy is no excuse. Distance is no excuse. Get out there and make a difference or come June our countryside will be running with blood and it’ll be on your hands. Join the Badger Army.

Once more unto the breech dear friends.

Accidental Activist 

Sign the petition to remove Owen Paterson from office.

Three Counties Hunt Sabs GoFundMe link.

Gloucstershire Badger Office

GABS facebook page

Somerset Against the Badger Cull facebook page

The IEP report

Resistance

 

That was the headline on a comment piece published in the Horse and Hound and written by Richard Gurney.

Let’s have a look at what Dick has to say.

“A small minority is being allowed to antagonise hunts trying to hunt within this wretched law (The Hunting Act 2004)”.

So first up the law is wretched is it? That law was put in place with overwhelming support from the public who don’t want to see the cruelty hunting with dogs involves. Whilst it might not be the best piece of legislation written and certainly not the easiest to police it’s here and here to stay. Old Dick clearly wants to return to the old ways everyone else finds so abhorrent.

“Once again we find ourselves fighting, but this time not to stop hunting being banned but for the right to go out and hunt a trail”.

So tell me Dick, how do you explain all those hunts going out every week without a trail being laid? Or perhaps the person laying the trail following the hunt, surely that’s the wrong way round? Can you also tell me why these mythical trails cross main roads – isn’t that a bit dangerous? Why do they also go through people’s gardens, villages and farm buildings? Funny how these trails actually seem to have a fox at the front of them running for its life.

Also if you’re hunting a trail why would you need those thugs on quad bikes? You probably know them as “terrier men”. I’d like to see one of these trails going to ground in a Badger sett. How do you dig out a trail, do you need special spades? What does the terrier sent down the hole look for?

“The constant provocation suffered by the hunting fraternity may lead to an incident. It is surely only a matter of time before someone is seriously hurt”

Well that sounds a bit like a threat to me. And the only provocation I’ve been witness to has always come from the hunting fraternity. There’s a clear link between cruelty to animals and violence towards ones fellow humans, the hunt sabs are only there to save foxes. They’re not hooligans having a day off from kicking the shit out each other on a day trip to the country. The video from my previous post speaks volumes. Don’t come crying like the wimp you are with dubious claims when someone spoils your nasty little idea of fun.

“We are never far from danger so it’s vital the Huntsman maintains control over his hounds at all time”.

That would include calling them off a fox or any other animal should they chase one I guess. If that’s the case why are animals both wild and domestic regularly killed by the hounds? Well either the huntsmen are pretty crappy at their job or they’re illegally hunting. Either way it’s not looking too good for your argument.

“As for filming children out riding, this is a totally different matter for discussion and is a subject that annoys parents and children alike”.

The video camera is a vital tool in gaining evidence and staying safe. I’d suggest to you that most responsible parents would frown on the promotion of an illegal and cruel activity and rightly so. The simple fact is that if you’re in a public place you have no right to privacy regardless of age. Sabs aren’t a bunch of paedophiles getting off on shakey video of children on horseback and you’re sounding somewhat desperate by implying as much. If the hunting fraternity has nothing to hide then there really should be an issue but clearly that’s not the case.

“These relentless attacks on hunts cannot be anything other than an invasion of privacy, of civil liberties and our right to go about our lawful business”.

You lose your right to civil liberties the moment you hunt a fox. It’s not lawful no matter how hard you try and dress it up or the pathetic excuses you hide behind. The day the hunts abide by the law and our wildlife becomes safe is the day the Hunt Saboteurs will stay at home in the warm and drink tea. Until that day they’ll always be there watching, recording and saving the animals you enjoy killing.

As lawful as a round of golf?

My arse.