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:
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.
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.
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
ADDITIONAL
Just look at the different approach TVP have towards hare coursing, the same legislation applies.
Should have gone to SpecSavers
Posted: February 7, 2019 in CommentTags: Biased Policing, Hunt Saboteurs, Inspector James Davies, Kimblewick Hunt, Quad bikes, Road Traffic Offences, Thames Valley Police
Here’s a question for you, How many people do you see riding on the quad bike in the picture below?
Here’s another question. Do you think the officer in the police car would have a good enough view to count the number of people on the quad?
Well apparently after a member of the public complained about the lack of action from the officers at the scene and they received this response from Thames Valley Police. Note in particular the highlighted bit in yellow.
Apparently inspector James Davies is unable to see there are 4 people on the quad. Here’s an enlarged version just in case you’re in any doubt. They could have of course asked for the video to be supplied for further evidence of wrong doing if they had any doubts.
It’s also clear from point 2 of the response that the police are choosing which crimes to police and which to ignore. If there’s a hunt going on all road traffic offences appear to become null and void – good to know that, I’ll pass it on to all sab drivers and let them know they can drive where they like and how they like, and yet why is it sab vehicles always get stopped for checks every time there’s a hunt in progress. Hmmm . . .
These are the details of the quad bike:
Now the police may well get a different MOT response but I’m still fairly sure that quad isn’t designed for 4 people. Thames Valley Police are there to uphold the law for the benefit of the general public, not for the benefit of a small minority who like to hunt sentient mammals for fun and to be honest had I received that response I’d be pretty insulted.
Fell free to complain.