# what most of us knew already :)



## Fairynuff (14 November 2020)

https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=VN4f303pZQk


----------



## Tiddlypom (14 November 2020)

Indeed we did.

I haven't listened to the leaked webinars, but I have read the full transcripts.

This is massive.




Pro hunt desperately trying a damage limitation exercise. Good luck with that .


----------



## Fairynuff (14 November 2020)

the sound of silence coming from the pro's is deafening !


----------



## Tiddlypom (14 November 2020)

This was posted on the This Is Hunting UK’s FB page.

’IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT

Please find below the following statement on behalf of the Hunting Office

“_The Hunting Office is facing allegations  that training webinars run during August, were organised for the purposes of covering up unlawful hunting._

_The truth is that two, hour long, Hunting Office webinars clearly dealt with the operation and promotion of legal trail hunting and managing animal rights activism. The allegation that they were organised to discuss covering up unlawful activities is totally incorrect and can only be made by taking a few individual short comments completely out of context._

_As you will be aware hunts face almost daily spurious allegations of illegal activity from anti hunt saboteurs and professional activists, and therefore not only have to operate within the law, but also have to be able overtly to demonstrate that they are doing so at any time._

_We would encourage you all to avoid commenting on these allegations on Social media or other public forums"_

_Thank you’_

Comments on that post have all gone, it is fair to say that all the posts I saw were not pro hunt.


----------



## Fairynuff (14 November 2020)

Tiddlypom said:



			This was posted on the This Is Hunting UK’s FB page.

’IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT

Please find below the following statement on behalf of the Hunting Office

“_The Hunting Office is facing allegations  that training webinars run during August, were organised for the purposes of covering up unlawful hunting._

_The truth is that two, hour long, Hunting Office webinars clearly dealt with the operation and promotion of legal trail hunting and managing animal rights activism. The allegation that they were organised to discuss covering up unlawful activities is totally incorrect and can only be made by taking a few individual short comments completely out of context._

_As you will be aware hunts face almost daily spurious allegations of illegal activity from anti hunt saboteurs and professional activists, and therefore not only have to operate within the law, but also have to be able overtly to demonstrate that they are doing so at any time._

_We would encourage you all to avoid commenting on these allegations on Social media or other public forums"_

_Thank you’_

Comments on that post have all gone, it is fair to say that all the posts I saw were not pro hunt.
		
Click to expand...

 Utter cowards and liars.


----------



## Wishfilly (14 November 2020)

I just saw a shortened version of this come up on twitter. I was genuinely shocked to see retired police officers apparently advising hunts on how to break the law, and to see a Tory Peer involved too. 

Are the people involved being investigated?


----------



## Tiddlypom (14 November 2020)

Transcript of video 1 

https://www.huntsabs.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Video-Transcript.pdf


Transcript of video 2 

https://www.huntsabs.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Video-2-Transcript.pdf


----------



## Sandstone1 (14 November 2020)

I think everyone already knew this.   Surely now its there in black and white and on film something will be done?


----------



## Sandstone1 (14 November 2020)

The silence is deafening.


----------



## Tiddlypom (14 November 2020)

An excerpt, this is from transcript 2. There is plenty more.

_*So this wasn’t about turning the Old Surrey, Burstow and West Kent into a trail laying pack, it was about giving us the support and protection that we needed.*
........._

_Approximately now two seasons ago we were hunting at a very popular meet, we had sort of 100 mounted and it was a good day everyone was looking forward to. It became clear at 12 o clock midday that we had been infiltrated by some 40-50 hunt saboteurs from both Guildford and Brighton and it was at that point that we decided,* the Master of the day decided, that we should revert to Plan B, Plan B being obviously using our team to lay trails for the rest of the day *because it became clear that the antis that had arrived were only there for one thing. They wanted a fight and they wanted a big fight. So the team was set in motion and off we went._


----------



## ycbm (14 November 2020)

Tiddlypom said:



			Transcript of video 1 

https://www.huntsabs.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Video-Transcript.pdf


Transcript of video 2 

https://www.huntsabs.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Video-2-Transcript.pdf

Click to expand...


There is absolutely no way they can claim that they are not talking about illegal  hunting in those two transcripts.  What idiots to record themselves saying it!


----------



## Fairynuff (14 November 2020)

ycbm said:



			There is absolutely no way they can claim that they are not talking about illegal  hunting in those two transcripts.  What idiots to record themselves saying it!
		
Click to expand...

 They aren't idiots, they are arrogant criminals .


----------



## Tiddlypom (14 November 2020)

From transcript 1

_It’s a lot easier to create a smokescreen if you’ve got more than one trail layer operating and that is what it’s all about, trying to portray to the people watching that you’re going about legitimate business. Obviously, it’s important for the trail layers to know where you’re going to go. Give them a brief beforehand, tell them what your order of draw is and if it changes for any reason let them know. You’ve got to have clear communication._

_....._

_It’s probably just as well to have something foul smelling on the end of the drag just in case an anti leaps out from behind a gateway and grabs hold of it and says, ‘This is just a clean hanky’ or something and of course the other thing you don’t want your trail layer getting mixed up with the, you know, stop at the meet or if there’s a check or wherever the hounds are and he’s stood in the middle discussing the next rule with the huntsman and the lure is just dangling down in front old Dreadnought’s nose and he’s paying no attention to it. Pretty obvious it’s no good for anything, so that is another very important factor to bear in mind while you’re doing all of this.
....._

_We need to have clear and visible trail laying going on on the day and it needs to be as plausible as possible._


----------



## angrybird1 (15 November 2020)

What we need is for these people to be prosecuted.      There is clearly no excuse for this. It's there in black and white.    If people think the so called antis will let this go they are very wrong.
Now is the time for hunting to be completely banned.   Once and for all.


----------



## shortstuff99 (15 November 2020)

I just can't comprehend why hunts are so determined to keep killing foxes, we are told all the time how it's actually about having a nice day out, being with friends etc and not about killing, so why are they bothered about killing then? I can see why general members of the public think hunt people just enjoy the killing.

If I honest I've been hunting a couple of times and will never go again, the people were rude, unfriendly, unhelpful and frankly snobbish (and this is a famous hunt) they do nothing for their image and perpetuate the stereotype.


----------



## ycbm (15 November 2020)

My favourite bit is the advice to use a different phone to communicate about the hunt organisation than the one you use to boast about your illegal exploits, in case the police take your phone as evidence.  

I think that (and most of the advice in the podcasts) is  called conspiracy to pervert the course of justice and it's a lot more serious a crime than a bit of illegal hunting! 
.


----------



## ycbm (15 November 2020)

Tiddlypom said:



			The allegation that they were organised to discuss covering up unlawful activities is totally incorrect and can only be made by taking a few individual short comments completely out of context.
		
Click to expand...

They may not have been organised to do it,  but they certainly did it!   There is no way you can take the advice to use two phones out of context.  




_As you will be aware hunts face almost daily spurious allegations of illegal activity from anti hunt saboteurs and professional activists, and therefore not only have to operate within the law, but also have to be able overtly to demonstrate that they are doing so at any time._

Click to expand...

Yes,  but the webinar advice was about how to realistically fake that overt demonstration.  




_We would encourage you all to avoid commenting on these allegations on Social media or other public forums"_

Click to expand...

I'm not surprised!


----------



## Red-1 (15 November 2020)

Ooops. 

Doesn't surprise me, I went hunting after the ban and they were overtly hunting the fox. I stopped going. It was laughing in the face of the law. Literally.


----------



## Tiddlypom (15 November 2020)

This will bring hunting down. It will take time, but there is no recovery from this.

It is all there in the webinars, with an eminent panel of hunting folk chaired by Lord Mancroft – Conservative Peer, Chair of the Masters of Foxhounds Association (MFHA) and former Chair of the Countryside Alliance, on how to hoodwink observers into believing that genuine trails are being laid and followed when they are not.

There were over 100 participants, mostly masters of hounds, listening in and learning from the webinars.

I remember that Alec, who used to be on HHO, once said that hunting would eventually be the author of its own demise. So true.

I hope that the person(s) who leaked the webinars has been able to cover their tracks. There will be some very angry people trying to track them down.


----------



## Fairynuff (15 November 2020)

'If you wait by the river long enough, the bodies of your enemies will float by.'


----------



## Tiddlypom (15 November 2020)

Fairynuff said:



			the sound of silence coming from the pro's is deafening !
		
Click to expand...

They will have gone to ground, and will be following the advice given out by the Hunting Office:-

_‘We would encourage you all to avoid commenting on these allegations on Social media or other public forums"’_

So it’s only us hunting sceptics left commenting.

Being naive, I used to believe the trail hunt lies. Had my eyes opened a few years ago now, though, but even then I didn’t realise how complicit and involved the whole hunting scene was. I had presumed that it was just a few rogue packs, not that it was led from the top down.


----------



## BeckyFlowers (15 November 2020)

*** sat waiting for the hunters to defend this *** tick tock tick tock.


----------



## Sandstone1 (15 November 2020)

Tiddlypom said:



			This will bring hunting down. It will take time, but there is no recovery from this.

It is all there in the webinars, with an eminent panel of hunting folk chaired by Lord Mancroft – Conservative Peer, Chair of the Masters of Foxhounds Association (MFHA) and former Chair of the Countryside Alliance, on how to hoodwink observers into believing that genuine trails are being laid and followed when they are not.

There were over 100 participants, mostly masters of hounds, listening in and learning from the webinars.

I remember that Alec, who used to be on HHO, once said that hunting would eventually be the author of its own demise. So true.

I hope that the person(s) who leaked the webinars has been able to cover their tracks. There will be some very angry people trying to track them down.
		
Click to expand...

I certainly hope it does bring hunting down.  Its long overdue.   So many people breaking the law in full view of the police.   I cant see how they can recover from this.   They will be try to sweep it under the carpet but I cant see how when its all clearly there.


----------



## Red-1 (15 November 2020)

I would hope Horse and Hound run an article on it, it is very topical...


----------



## Wishfilly (15 November 2020)

Tiddlypom said:



			They will have gone to ground, and will be following the advice given out by the Hunting Office:-

_‘We would encourage you all to avoid commenting on these allegations on Social media or other public forums"’_

So it’s only us hunting sceptics left commenting.

Being naive, I used to believe the trail hunt lies. Had my eyes opened a few years ago now, though, but even then I didn’t realise how complicit and involved the whole hunting scene was. I had presumed that it was just a few rogue packs, not that it was led from the top down.
		
Click to expand...

I sort of felt the same. 

I also believed the police when they said the hunting act was just impossible to enforce. But now I wonder if the will simply isn't there.


----------



## DabDab (15 November 2020)

Hmm....
Well they could just about get the benefit of the doubt in the first (with the possible exception of a couple of sentences from the police officer), but the second one...well it just is what it is really. 

I just hope other areas of equestrianism don't get caught up in too much in the ever plummeting reputation of hunting.


----------



## Tiddlypom (15 November 2020)

Wishfilly said:



			I also believed the police when they said the hunting act was just impossible to enforce. But now I wonder if the will simply isn't there.
		
Click to expand...

According to the speaker on transcript 2, the hunts are not finding the police to be overly amenable in supporting them. I am sure that the police Wildlife Liason Officers will be taking due note of being described as ‘raving antis’ .

_If you haven’t got any viable trail laying evidence how on earth are we going to refute these allegations? And this is increasingly come to light with this *now that the police are not prepared to support us when we have problems with saboteurs*, if we can’t prove quite conclusively that we’re not taking the mickey and just using this as a shield.
....._

_Fair to say, 95% of police officers that you’re going to come into contact with out hunting have no knowledge of hunting offences, they won’t be overly interested, they’ve generally been out on patrol, they’ve either fallen across you or they’ve had a report that there’s some hunting, could they go along and have a look._

_They’re probably going to turn up, ask you what you’re doing - if you can show them the bit of trail or hunting, people laying trails, they’ll disappear and go away again._

_The other 5%, you’re going to get pretty much a split down the middle, half of them are going to be keen hunting folk, there are police officers who are keen hunting folk, *the other half are going to be raving antis.*_

_*The problems for the hunt are most of the raving antis are the ones that have gone on to become Wildlife Liaison Officers* and they’re the ones, if you get a retrospective inquiry or report from the antis, monitors, they send the videos in, it gets referred to the wildlife liaison officers, they’re the ones that are going to be investigating it._


----------



## palo1 (16 November 2020)

Fairynuff said:



			the sound of silence coming from the pro's is deafening !
		
Click to expand...

The reason people won't comment is because they have been asked not to.  Simple.


----------



## Sandstone1 (16 November 2020)

palo1 said:



			The reason people won't comment is because they have been asked not to.  Simple.
		
Click to expand...

True, also because there is no defense for it.  What are they going to say?  yes we do hunt foxes. we know its illegal and were all discussing how to get away with it. ?


----------



## The Jokers Girl (16 November 2020)

I've always avoided the hunting section of this forum as the amount of pro bloodsport hunt posters sickens me with how open and brazen they are.  It's interesting to see that none of the cowardly hunters that usually post are posting on this thread defending the transcripts and explaining what was "actually"  meant. I hope this is the demise of the illegal bloodsport in the UK.  We can only hope.


----------



## BeckyFlowers (16 November 2020)

palo1 said:



			The reason people won't comment is because they have been asked not to.  Simple.
		
Click to expand...

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣


----------



## The Jokers Girl (16 November 2020)

palo1 said:



			The reason people won't comment is because they have been asked not to.  Simple.
		
Click to expand...

They've also been asked in law not to hunt and kill defenseless animals by ripping them to shreads with  screaming pack of out of control hounds but they still do it.  Morons.


----------



## Sandstone1 (16 November 2020)

we can hope but knowing what they are like they will try to wriggle out of it.  They will all be desperately trying to come up with excuses for what they really meant and that it was all taken out of context etc etc.


----------



## BeckyFlowers (16 November 2020)

The Jokers Girl said:



			They've also been asked in law not to hunt and kill defenseless animals by ripping them to shreads with  screaming pack of out of control hounds but they still do it.  Morons
		
Click to expand...

Was just about to say the same thing, once I'd finished laughing at the irony.


----------



## ycbm (16 November 2020)

palo1 said:



			The reason people won't comment is because they have been asked not to.  Simple.
		
Click to expand...

Palo your defense of illegal hunting beats me. I wondered why,  on another thread,  you knew for a certainty that people who follow a hunt which they know is hunting fox illegally are not committing a criminal offence,  only the hunt officials.  I guess now we know why you had felt the need to be sure of that yourself.
.


----------



## meggymoo (16 November 2020)

"Video no longer available due to a copywriter claim by the Hunt office". Theres a surprise.


----------



## Tiddlypom (16 November 2020)

meggymoo said:



			"Video no longer available due to a copywriter claim by the Hunt office". Theres a surprise.
		
Click to expand...

Surprising that it took so long for that to happen, pro hunt legal beagles will have been scrambling to find a way, any way, to get it off FB et al .

But the transcripts remain, and I for one have saved those to Word. Plus many folk will have saved the webinar footage to their hard drive, too.



palo1 said:



			The reason people won't comment is because they have been asked not to.  Simple.
		
Click to expand...

 Of course. You are awaiting instructions from the hunting high ups on what it is permissible to post.

I like you as a poster, palo1, and I’d like to believe your previous assertions that your small pack does indeed trail hunt, but those webinars have blasted any trust in what the hunting community say out of the water.

Remember that I used to hunt well before the ban - I had been out with 7 different packs over a few seasons. Once the Hunting Act came in, I believed that hunts had indeed switched to trail hunting - and I would never have condoned or followed any pack that was still illegally hunting.


----------



## palo1 (16 November 2020)

ycbm said:



			Palo your defense of illegal hunting beats me. I wondered why,  on another thread,  you knew for a certainty that people who follow a hunt which they know is hunting fox illegally are not committing a criminal offence,  only the hunt officials.  I guess now we know why you had felt the need to be sure of that yourself.
.
		
Click to expand...

I am not sure what you are implying here @ycbm but in that other thread and post I was simply reporting what the legality of the hunt follower is.  When the ban on hunting was introduced most people who wanted to continue were informed that this was the position that they would be in.  I have never had need to identify a particular legal situation in relation to myself personally speaking nor in relation to a specific situation that I have encountered.


----------



## palo1 (16 November 2020)

Tiddlypom said:



			Surprising that it took so long for that to happen, pro hunt legal beagles will have been scrambling to find a way, any way, to get it off FB et al .

But the transcripts remain, and I for one have saved those to Word. Plus many folk will have saved the webinar footage to their hard drive, too.

Of course. You are awaiting instructions from the hunting high ups on what it is permissible to post.

I like you as a poster, palo1, and I’d like to believe your previous assertions that your small pack does indeed trail hunt, but those webinars have blasted any trust in what the hunting community say out of the water.

Remember that I used to hunt well before the ban - I had been out with 7 different packs over a few seasons. Once the Hunting Act came in, I believed that hunts had indeed switched to trail hunting - and I would never have condoned or followed any pack that was still illegally hunting.
		
Click to expand...

Thank you for your kind words Tiddlypom.  I am not waiting for 'instructions' in any way lol as it is most unlikely that anyone would contact me to tell me what to say or do but I am happy enough that the body overseeing hunting has asked people, quite reasonably, not to comment on the HSA post and accusations.  I have no desire to play into a HSA led dance and cannot really offer anything to a discussion; I too have watched the webinars though and read the transcripts.  I have no intention of saying what I think here - it simply isn't productive for either party in the debate.


----------



## conniegirl (16 November 2020)

I just hope that this doesn’t bring down the hunts who have genuinely been hunting within the spirit and letter of the law.
One of my local hunts is one of the few good ones and it would be a shame for them to be brought down by morons with overinflated egos who continue to hunt foxes


----------



## meleeka (16 November 2020)

palo1 said:



			Thank you for your kind words Tiddlypom.  I am not waiting for 'instructions' in any way lol as it is most unlikely that anyone would contact me to tell me what to say or do but I am happy enough that the body overseeing hunting has asked people, quite reasonably, not to comment on the HSA post and accusations.  I have no desire to play into a HSA led dance and cannot really offer anything to a discussion; I too have watched the webinars though and read the transcripts.  I have no intention of saying what I think here - it simply isn't productive for either party in the debate.
		
Click to expand...

Are you a politician?  If not you might want to consider it as a career


----------



## ester (16 November 2020)

re. the 'silence' I don't actually think we have that may regulars who are hunting subscribers here anymore. It's a very quiet part of the forum in general.


----------



## palo1 (16 November 2020)

meleeka said:



			Are you a politician?  If not you might want to consider it as a career 

Click to expand...

Lol - I am certain that is not intended as a compliment (well not in my book anyway) but it made me chuckle so thank you anyway !!


----------



## palo1 (16 November 2020)

ester said:



			re. the 'silence' I don't actually think we have that may regulars who are hunting subscribers here anymore. It's a very quiet part of the forum in general.
		
Click to expand...

Even though the Horse and Hound publication has been completely clear about it's support for legal hunting (and especially so of late) this would not be most people's choice of place to discuss hunting matters as clearly it is rather more popular with those that do not wish to see any kind of hunting related activity continue in the UK.  That does sort of make it a teeny bit 'unwelcoming' and unpopular with those that do want to discuss hunting...I am not sure why I respond to threads on here mostly as there are other more interesting places to do that tbh.


----------



## ester (16 November 2020)

It's shifted over the past few years I think but it's certainly not a novel silence.


----------



## ycbm (16 November 2020)

palo1 said:



			.  When the ban on hunting was introduced most people who wanted to continue were informed that this was the position that they would be in.
		
Click to expand...


Why did anyone need to be informed that they would not be committing a criminal offence if they followed a hunt which was hunting illegally,  unless people fully intended to be hunting illegally? 

I don't know why I'm arguing about this really.  In Cheshire we all  knew that  hunts  were deliberately laying no trails or false/weak trails and continuing to hunt fox.   Many years ago on this forum I was accused of lying about it. I'm pleased that it can no longer plausibly be denied.
.


----------



## Tiddlypom (16 November 2020)

ester said:



			re. the 'silence' I don't actually think we have that may regulars who are hunting subscribers here anymore. It's a very quiet part of the forum in general.
		
Click to expand...

There are a few, though, and several have posted elsewhere on the forum since this thread became live - they will not be unaware of it .

Palo, I don’t think there are many ‘ban all forms of hunting’ folk on here. There is support for genuine trail hunting, drag hunting and hunting the clean boot (not sure on all the correct nomenclature for all of those, I only took part in the full fat version pre ban).

My own local pack went legit from the start of the 2019/20 season. Trouble was, it had long been that saying it was legit before that when it wasn’t. It was only the threat of losing access to a large tranch of country because the estate was fed up of all the bad publicity that they were bringing that forced the change to trail hunting. (I know this from first and second hand conversations with folk directly involved with followers of that pack, not from anything that the antis may have said).

They do seem to be enjoying themselves trail hunting. The antis pop in from time to time to keep an eye on them, but seem satisfied that nothing untoward is now going on.


It‘s a huge relief that peace has been restored for us residents, too.


----------



## palo1 (16 November 2020)

ycbm said:



			Why did anyone need to be informed that they would not be committing a criminal offence if they followed a hunt which was hunting illegally,  unless people fully intended to be hunting illegally?

I don't know why I'm arguing about this really.  In Cheshire we all  knew that  hunts  were deliberately laying no trails or false/weak trails and continuing to hunt fox.   Many years ago on this forum I was accused of lying about it. I'm pleased that it can no longer plausibly be denied.
.
		
Click to expand...




Tiddlypom said:



			There are a few, though, and several have posted elsewhere on the forum since this thread became live - they will not be unaware of it .

Palo, I don’t think there are many ‘ban all forms of hunting’ folk on here. There is support for genuine trail hunting, drag hunting and hunting the clean boot (not sure on all the correct nomenclature for all of those, I only took part in the full fat version pre ban).

My own local pack went legit from the start of the 2019/20 season. Trouble was, it had long been that saying it was legit before that when it wasn’t. It was only the threat of losing access to a large tranch of country because the estate was fed up of all the bad publicity that they were bringing that forced the change to trail hunting. (I know this from first and second hand conversations with folk directly involved with followers of that pack, not from anything that the antis may have said).

They do seem to be enjoying themselves trail hunting. The antis pop in from time to time to keep an eye on them, but seem satisfied that nothing untoward is now going on.


It‘s a huge relief that peace has been restored for us residents, too.
		
Click to expand...

That is good to hear  It seems as if no matter what I might say people will suggest that I am dissembling or lying really on this part of the forum about this issue but I do know that our local wildlife liaison officer is a decent bloke (I have no idea how he feels about hunting or anything else though as I have only heard him speak at meetings and heard what other locals have to say about him) and when accosted at a Wildlife Trust meeting about illegal hunting felt able to say that around here it is not an issue.  How that *may* be interpreted by others I have no idea but my interpretation was that he did not feel that illegal hunting was threatening local wildlife.  I can only speak as I find and believe.   The debate seems akin to that around drink driving; it is illegal to drink and drive but people are still allowed to go to the pub.  Publicans and the brewery industry are not and should not be treated as complicit in drink driving offences though their occupation makes them more vulnerable to being associated with those crimes.  Not everyone that goes to the pub will drive home over the limit though some will and there will be disastrous consequences.  We are still licensing pubs and allowing them to serve alcohol. 

But hey ho, this part of the forum is not that interesting and whatever the result of the HSA's hysterical 'Mass Criminality in Hunting Community...' 'scoop' is will play out eventually.  I am not holding my breath tbh.


----------



## Tiddlypom (16 November 2020)

palo1 said:



			The debate seems akin to that around drink driving; it is illegal to drink and drive but people are still allowed to go to the pub.
		
Click to expand...

Eh? There is no comparison between someone going to the pub and drinking within the limit to someone who rides with an illegally hunting pack.

The former is both morally sound and technically legal, the latter whilst it may not be technically illegal is morally utterly reprehensible. The person knows that they are involved in and supporting an illegal activity.

And then you further spoil things by calling the HSA scoop ‘hysterical’. I think not.


----------



## The Jokers Girl (16 November 2020)

Tiddlypom said:



			Eh? There is no comparison between someone going to the pub and drinking within the limit to someone who rides with an illegally hunting pack.

The former is both morally sound and technically legal, the latter whilst it may not be technically illegal is morally utterly reprehensible. The person knows that they are involved in and supporting an illegal activity.

And then you further spoil things by calling the HSA scoop ‘hysterical’. I think not.
		
Click to expand...

I think posters like palo may be why the hunting office asked illegal hunters to keep quiet as they are just making things worse for them


----------



## ester (16 November 2020)

I understood palos point to be a comparison between those riding out with legal packs, and those riding with illegal packs?


----------



## The Jokers Girl (16 November 2020)

ester said:



			I understood palos point to be a comparison between those riding out with legal packs, and those riding with illegal packs?
		
Click to expand...

But I don't think anyone has an issue with legal trail, drag hunting etc.  It's the mindless torture and killing of defenseless animals, after you've chased them for several miles across countryside,  often through private land and properties  causing other damage in their wake that is the issue.
The hunt local to me certainly don't operate legally.  If they did they wouldn't have been banned from entering local farms in the area after the hounds have killed pets and farm animals.  If the hunt was legal and they were following a set scent trail they wouldn't be so far into private land doing horrific damage to their pets and livelihood.
I'm certainly not going to name the pack but if you google them there is all sorts of articles reporting on their activities and the damage and distress they have caused


----------



## ester (16 November 2020)

perhaps palo can clarify  it wasn't really my point to make I just interpreted it differently.

I don't need to google anything- hard to google something you aren't given the name of anyway. I am aware of one up here and one in somerset that spend a lot of time upsetting people with their behaviour.


----------



## ycbm (16 November 2020)

palo1 said:



			The debate seems akin to that around drink driving; it is illegal to drink and drive but people are still allowed to go to the pub.  Publicans and the brewery industry are not and should not be treated as complicit in drink driving offences though their occupation makes them more vulnerable to being associated with those crimes.  Not everyone that goes to the pub will drive home over the limit though some will and there will be disastrous consequences.  We are still licensing pubs and allowing them to serve alcohol. 
.
		
Click to expand...


Doesn't work for me, P, sorry.  The Pub industry would be very outspoken if  publicans were exposed as encouraging people who are over the limit to drive. And it is inconceivable that anyone would train publicans to do that.

The rest of the people in the pub are not complicit in the drink driving offence,  while an illegal fox hunt has dozens or even hundreds who know exactly what is being done but don't report it.  And worse,  the entire legal hunting industry in the UK, drag and trail,  knew what was going on and seemingly failed to lift a finger to stop it.  

The silence from the powers that be in fox hunting has been deafening, with a statement limited to saying things have been taken out of context, (when they clearly have not),  and telling people who hunt not to talk about it,  in the hope that the issue will die down.

I hope we have reached a turning point with this exposure,  and illegal  hunting will now stop.


----------



## The Jokers Girl (16 November 2020)

It was a figure speech  I wasn't asking you to google anything  just making the point that the pack local to me operate very much outside the law and have been publicly called out on in many times after peoples animals on private land have been killed.

Yes maybe palo can clarify her comparison to drink driving (blood sport hunting) that everyone knows is illegal, but popping to the pub for a pint (trail/drag hunting) isn't.


----------



## Tiddlypom (16 November 2020)

I think it was palo in an earlier thread who pointed out that you are not breaking the law if you knowingly take part in illegal hunting but as a member of the field. It is the masters and the hunt staff who would carry the can if the case came to court.

It is fair to say that I have no time for people who are happy to use that cop out.


----------



## PurBee (16 November 2020)

Gloucestershire hunt, hunt foxes. I saw it with my own eyes as i was relaxing in my friends quaint village garden having a cuppa! Heard screaming pack of hounds in the fields below...no horses....then suddenly a huge fox flew up the lane, and scrambled over a tall stone wall into a churchyard...the dogs got closer but lost the scent and went another direction. So the dogs had fox scent, and still going for them, even if a trail had been laid.


----------



## palo1 (16 November 2020)

Tiddlypom said:



			I think it was palo in an earlier thread who pointed out that you are not breaking the law if you knowingly take part in illegal hunting but as a member of the field. It is the masters and the hunt staff who would carry the can if the case came to court.

It is fair to say that I have no time for people who are happy to use that cop out.
		
Click to expand...

I certainly didn't say that.


----------



## palo1 (16 November 2020)

ester said:



			I understood palos point to be a comparison between those riding out with legal packs, and those riding with illegal packs?
		
Click to expand...

Exactly this. And many people in a pub will see people drinking to excess and possibly even know that they will get in a vehicle to drive.  Publicans are entirely aware of those of their customers that do this as well.  I do understand however that this discussion isn't about drink driving - I just felt it to be a fairly similar analogy.


----------



## Tiddlypom (16 November 2020)

palo1 said:



			I certainly didn't say that.
		
Click to expand...

Ok, apologies, it must have been another poster who said that.

I still have no time for anyone who hunts illegally.

ETA And I’d dib in any drink driver or preferably remove the keys before they got behind the wheel.


----------



## palo1 (16 November 2020)

It is just the law that those responsible for illegal hunting are hunt staff; I have pointed this out elsewhere but purely because, pedantically it irritates me that people who don't know assume that anyone can be responsible for illegal hunting (well they can if they are hunting with more than 2 dogs actually but I think it's clear what I meant). I have certainly never, ever suggested that this would be any kind of cop out or reason to be present if you knew illegal hunting was taking place.


----------



## The Jokers Girl (16 November 2020)

Tiddlypom said:



			Ok, apologies, it must have been another poster who said that.
		
Click to expand...

Not on this thread but in another thread some months back, that another poster referenced. Don't know how to link threads but post below 

" I am sorry to say this but you are wrong about participating in illegal hunting meaning that you are breaking the law. The law is quite clear that the person hunting the hounds and any formal and identified staff with him are responsible in that situation. The field may be entirely in the wrong morally if they are participating knowingly in illegal hunting but they are not responsible for it so are not breaking the law. I don't believe that there is any law that relates to that particular situation though potentially being complicit in animal cruelty may have some legal relevance."


----------



## palo1 (16 November 2020)

The Jokers Girl said:



			Not on this thread but in another thread some months back, that another poster referenced. Don't know how to link threads but post below

" I am sorry to say this but you are wrong about participating in illegal hunting meaning that you are breaking the law. The law is quite clear that the person hunting the hounds and any formal and identified staff with him are responsible in that situation. The field may be entirely in the wrong morally if they are participating knowingly in illegal hunting but they are not responsible for it so are not breaking the law. I don't believe that there is any law that relates to that particular situation though potentially being complicit in animal cruelty may have some legal relevance."
		
Click to expand...

Thank you for retrieving this.


----------



## The Jokers Girl (16 November 2020)

palo1 said:



			Thank you for retrieving this. 

Click to expand...

You're welcome 😊


----------



## ester (16 November 2020)

The Jokers Girl said:



			It was a figure speech  I wasn't asking you to google anything 

Click to expand...

No need to roll your eyes, not everyone picks up on figures of speech especially when written, some of us are autistic  but yeah you crack on and roll your eyes at us when we try to respond, makes us feel great.


----------



## ycbm (16 November 2020)

palo1 said:



			It is just the law that those responsible for illegal hunting are hunt staff
		
Click to expand...


You've missed a word out Palo. Those _criminally_ responsible are the hunt staff.  Those responsible are all the people who follow the hunt and everyone else who knows what they are doing and doesn't report it. 

I've been guilty in the past myself,  failing to report friends who I know have been hunting fox,  so I'm not suggesting it's easy.  But in this case the entire hunting  community including drag packs knew what was going on and are complicit.,


----------



## The Jokers Girl (16 November 2020)

ester said:



			No need to roll your eyes, not everyone picks up on figures of speech especially when written, some of us are autistic  but yeah you crack on and roll your eyes at us when we try to respond, makes us feel great.
		
Click to expand...

My husband has ASD so don't pull that card on me and I will roll my eyes at whomever i choose!
And you clearly knew what I meant as your response was rather sarcastic


----------



## ester (16 November 2020)

urgh, why can't people be a bit kinder to others  it's not pulling a card, we aren't all the same it's stating a fact that you just made me feel terrible for taking your post as written, when I was trying to respond helpfully.


----------



## Tiddlypom (16 November 2020)

palo1 said:



			I have certainly never, ever suggested that this would be any kind of cop out or reason to be present if you knew illegal hunting was taking place.
		
Click to expand...

No, you have not, and I did not intend you to take from my post to read that you condoned it.

My comment ‘It is fair to say that I have no time for people who are happy to use that cop out‘ was not intended to be aimed at you at all . I can only apologise for the misunderstanding.


----------



## palo1 (16 November 2020)

Tiddlypom said:



			No, you have not, and I did not intend you to take from my post to read that you condoned it.

My comment ‘It is fair to say that I have no time for people who are happy to use that cop out‘ was not intended to be aimed at you at all . I can only apologise for the misunderstanding.
		
Click to expand...

No problem at all - thank you for clarifying that though.


----------



## Bernster (16 November 2020)

I wouldn’t expect pro fox hunters (or maybe a better term is those who don’t support the ban) to comment much on this thread as I don’t think it’s a very welcome place for them.  I thought there was a much more constructive thread elsewhere on here which helped me to understand different perspectives a bit more.

I get that people feel very strongly but I also don’t think everyone who goes out with/follows trail hunts is quite as ‘evil‘ as some on here seem to feel.  I can’t comment sensibly on the webinars posted about as I haven’t watched them.

And before people assume my opinions on it, I didn’t hunt pre the ban.  I did trail hunt a bit but there were times it seemed like they weren’t acting within law.  So I switched to drag hunting.


----------



## Tiddlypom (17 November 2020)

Bernster said:



			I get that people feel very strongly but I also don’t think everyone who goes out with/follows trail hunts is quite as ‘evil‘ as some on here seem to feel. I can’t comment sensibly on the webinars posted about as I haven’t watched them.
		
Click to expand...

You really do need to watch the webinars or read the transcripts . They are dynamite.

It is not properly run trail hunting that is the problem, it is widespread fox hunting, which is going on under the guise of trail hunting, where people understandably have issues.

So when folk insist that they are trail hunting, but are actually cheerfully fox hunting, as commonly happens, no wonder we are leery about it.

I cannot imagine that anyone following a pack which is hunting foxes, rather than following trails, is unaware of that fact. You had your suspicions when you went out, weren’t happy and subsequently switched to drag hunting .


----------



## Bernster (17 November 2020)

Aye, TP, sadly one lot didn’t do much to hide it.


----------



## shortstuff99 (17 November 2020)

Tiddlypom said:



			You really do need to watch the webinars or read the transcripts . They are dynamite.

It is not properly run trail hunting that is the problem, it is widespread fox hunting, which is going on under the guise of trail hunting, where people understandably have issues.

So when folk insist that they are trail hunting, but are actually cheerfully fox hunting, as commonly happens, no wonder we are leery about it.

I cannot imagine that anyone following a pack which is hunting foxes, rather than following trails, is unaware of that fact. You had your suspicions when you went out, weren’t happy and subsequently switched to drag hunting .
		
Click to expand...

Also the big issue is a lot of the hunts flouting the law take the general public for fools, people can tell when they are not trail hunting but instead we are told how they are hunting within the law and that 'townies' just hate them. This doesn't help their image. If they hunted within the law and could clearly show anyone that then I think they would (mostly) be left alone.


----------



## ihatework (17 November 2020)

Bernster said:



			I wouldn’t expect pro fox hunters (or maybe a better term is those who don’t support the ban) to comment much on this thread as I don’t think it’s a very welcome place for them.  I thought there was a much more constructive thread elsewhere on here which helped me to understand different perspectives a bit more.

I get that people feel very strongly but I also don’t think everyone who goes out with/follows trail hunts is quite as ‘evil‘ as some on here seem to feel.  I can’t comment sensibly on the webinars posted about as I haven’t watched them.

And before people assume my opinions on it, I didn’t hunt pre the ban.  I did trail hunt a bit but there were times it seemed like they weren’t acting within law.  So I switched to drag hunting.
		
Click to expand...

I don’t think people who hunt are evil at all. In my experience the vast majority (London toffs excluded) are exceptionally countryside orientated, with conservation in mind and overall are very pro animal welfare. Living in the middle of big hunt country, individually, my experience of people who are pro hunt is very positive.

I think it’s very difficult for anti’s to see that when all they see in front of them are Fox murderers. For me it’s an ironic kind of situation when I generally support the act of hunting, which by its very nature kills animals.

But what I do not like it the collective ‘hunt’. These very nice individuals get together and then become something different. Disruptive. Entitled. Arrogant. Law Breaking.

I think this thread just goes to demonstrate what some hunts think they can or should be allowed to get away with. Like it or not, hunting is now illegal. We all know it goes on.


----------



## Wishfilly (17 November 2020)

Bernster said:



			I wouldn’t expect pro fox hunters (or maybe a better term is those who don’t support the ban) to comment much on this thread as I don’t think it’s a very welcome place for them.  I thought there was a much more constructive thread elsewhere on here which helped me to understand different perspectives a bit more.

I get that people feel very strongly but I also don’t think everyone who goes out with/follows trail hunts is quite as ‘evil‘ as some on here seem to feel.  I can’t comment sensibly on the webinars posted about as I haven’t watched them.

And before people assume my opinions on it, I didn’t hunt pre the ban.  I did trail hunt a bit but there were times it seemed like they weren’t acting within law.  So I switched to drag hunting.
		
Click to expand...

I'm more concerned that ex-police officers and a Tory Peer seem to think encouraging law breaking is ok. In my opinion, that's actually a bigger problem than whether hunting is right or wrong.

If people want the law on hunting to change, surely they should try to do this through the legal channels, not just actively flout the law? 

The law (currently) is what it is, and surely people should abide by that? 

To me, this isn't really about the hunting debate as such. It's about the rule of law. 

I would really suggest reading the transcripts, especially the second one. I found it quite shocking.


----------



## ycbm (17 November 2020)

Wishfilly said:



			I'm more concerned that ex-police officers and a Tory Peer seem to think encouraging law breaking is ok. In my opinion, that's actually a bigger problem than whether hunting is right or wrong.

If people want the law on hunting to change, surely they should try to do this through the legal channels, not just actively flout the law? 

The law (currently) is what it is, and surely people should abide by that? 

To me, this isn't really about the hunting debate as such. It's about the rule of law. 

I would really suggest reading the transcripts, especially the second one. I found it quite shocking.
		
Click to expand...



I agree with you.  I thought there were parts which amounted to conspiracy to commit a crime and conspiracy to pervert the course of justice,  and those are far more serious offences than illegal hunting.  
.


----------



## Wishfilly (17 November 2020)

ycbm said:



			I agree with you.  I thought there were parts which amounted to conspiracy to commit a crime and conspiracy to pervert the course of justice,  and those are far more serious offences than illegal hunting. 
.
		
Click to expand...

Yes. Ironically, I'm sure one of the ex-police officers points this out in the transcript.

I am pretty sure if ex-police officers commit a serious crime, they can lose access to their pensions too, so this could have serious implications for them.

It seems like they are either very confident in not getting caught, or very confident that they wouldn't get prosecuted. I think it is a real problem for society when certain groups _appear _not to have to follow the same laws as everyone else.


----------



## Tiddlypom (18 November 2020)

This was posted by an anti FB group - I don’t know if this chap really said what was ascribed to him, but there is such a person who was indeed master of the Ryeford Chase Hunt.




The last sentence ‘An obvious problem is that now legislators are no longer going to believe in trail hunting’ is the crunch point.

No matter whether individuals can go on to be prosecuted for some of the more unguarded comments on the webinars, the cover and pretence of ‘trail hunting’ has been blown out of the water.

This is not going to be buried. The webinars are in public circulation, MPs have received them and it is only a matter of time before they are acted on.

My fear is that the backlash will result in the eventual  prohibition of all hunting with hounds, drag packs included. This will be pretty tough on those who have done nothing wrong, but they will know who has let them down.


----------



## ycbm (18 November 2020)

Tiddlypom said:



			My fear is that the backlash will result in the eventual  prohibition of all hunting with hounds, drag packs included. This will be pretty tough on those who have done nothing wrong, but they will know who has let them down.
		
Click to expand...

To be honest TP, those who have done nothing wrong have also let themselves down. The two drag packs I hunted with were organised by people who knew exactly what the "trail hunts" in other areas were doing but they said and did nothing to stop it. 
.


----------



## Fern007 (19 November 2020)

I used to avoid this section as I knew ( as most of us did and definitely the hunters did) what was going on. You could argue until you were blue in the face but having seen it all I knew what they were doing. Hopefully something will get done .


----------



## Sandstone1 (24 November 2020)

Is there any update on whats happening about this?   I guess once this lockdown ends they will be hunting again?


----------



## Tiddlypom (24 November 2020)

It’s just been reported today that the police and the CPS are looking into the indiscretions revealed in the leaked webinars.

https://www.itv.com/news/2020-11-24...ting-webinars-held-by-huntings-governing-body

A few individuals will be wishing that they had reworded some of their contributions to the webinars . 
_
According to a senior police officer, they will “consider exactly what’s being said and what is going on” and *the police say they now plan to review their relationships with hunts.*_

I bet they will. Whether or not the CPS decide to prosecute individuals, the tips and tricks of creating a smokescreen to facilitate illegal hunting are right out of the bag now.


----------



## Tiddlypom (24 November 2020)

Antis are expecting/hoping for a 5 minute report on this on tonight’s ITV News at 10.


----------



## Tiddlypom (25 November 2020)

I thought that the report on hunting on last night’s News at 10 was excellent and not sensationalist.

https://www.itv.com/news/2020-11-24...ting-webinars-held-by-huntings-governing-body

The quotes from the leaked webinars were voiced over by actors, and the speakers themselves were not identified.

_The Hunting Office chose not to comment on the police investigating the webinars but they say: “Viewed objectively, the purpose of the webinars is very clear and the allegation that they were organised to discuss covering up unlawful activities is incorrect and can only be made by taking a few individual, short comments completely out of context.”_

The trouble with that response is that the whole three hours is there to be viewed, listened to and dissected, it’s not a snatched conversation taken out of context.

ETA
Deputy Chief Constable Paul Netherton, National Police Chief Council lead for fox hunting, said: "The police are currently investigating and examining video content from two webinars on the theme of hunting which have recently come to our attention.

We are working in conjunction with the CPS to see if any criminal offences have been committed."


----------



## Lipglosspukka (26 November 2020)

I hunted perhaps 6 or 7 times with my local hunt a few years back. I never witnessed fox hunting and genuinely believed they acted within the law. 

I was very shocked to see that one of the people on the video was one of the masters of the same hunt.


----------



## palo1 (27 November 2020)

Just copying my post to another thread - in relation to the research/veterinary understanding of the issues around hunting.  I know it is not directly related to this thread but I think people may find it useful when considering their attitudes to hunting (legal and pre-ban). 

Is it possible for people to read this paper from 2018 (revised from 2009) ? https://vawm.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Hunting-Wildlife-Moral-Issue-March-2018.pdf It is from the Veterinary Association for Wildlife Management and regards the moral issue around hunting and foxes in particular. Other studies consider a range of species management strategies too, including the second paper here: https://vawm.org.uk/animal-welfare/

Most of us believe that vets intrinsically have an objective and educated view of animal welfare issues and the VAWM is open to all vets with an interest in wildlife. I think that anyone who has an interest in hunting or wildlife should read this; there is no 'counter' paper produced by wildlife vets or vets at all on this subject nor are the conclusions in these papers challenged by any science or veterinary organisation.


----------



## claireannejames (27 November 2020)

I have always felt that the open claims of the MFHA that member hunts use 'animal scent' for trails 'to mimic the scent of the traditional quarry' was surely proof of intent, since hounds cannot tell the difference between a laid, animal scent trail, (even if there is one), and a live fox who happens by.  This is used by them to plead 'accident' in court when caught killing but surely a decent lawyer should have been able to prove intent to break the law.  If you don't want to break the Hunting Act you use non-animal scent like the True Drag hunts and Bloodhound hunts (clean boot) do.  Hopefully now that this zoom footage is out there, there will finally be pressure to shut them down. Just a shame that the MDBA did not distance Drag and Bloodhound hunting from Trail hunting early on, I think this scandal could see the end of all types of hunting with hounds.  And it will be the Trail Hunter's fault.  They should have all converted to True Drag from day one after the law was passed - non animal scent trails, prepared lines of fences, no secrecy about lines so it's clear when hounds go off the scent.  THAT is hunting within the law.


----------



## claireannejames (27 November 2020)

Tiddlypom said:



			This was posted by an anti FB group - I don’t know if this chap really said what was ascribed to him, but there is such a person who was indeed master of the Ryeford Chase Hunt.

View attachment 59291


The last sentence ‘An obvious problem is that now legislators are no longer going to believe in trail hunting’ is the crunch point.

No matter whether individuals can go on to be prosecuted for some of the more unguarded comments on the webinars, the cover and pretence of ‘trail hunting’ has been blown out of the water.

This is not going to be buried. The webinars are in public circulation, MPs have received them and it is only a matter of time before they are acted on.

My fear is that the backlash will result in the eventual  prohibition of all hunting with hounds, drag packs included. This will be pretty tough on those who have done nothing wrong, but they will know who has let them down.
		
Click to expand...


YES agreed with your last point.  Hopefully Bloodhound hunting can be saved, as it's a completely different type of hound and obvious to all that they follow the clean boot.  That's my hope anyway.  Here's to hundreds more Bloodhound packs and an end to Trail Hunting.  I do feel sorry for the Drag packs but to be fair they have failed to distance themselves and speak out against Trail hunting officially, as they should have done.  Lots of masters and huntsmen moved between Trail and Drag hunting and many who follow drag also follow trail, so I guess that's why.  A shame.   But then, there is alot of shame going around this week.


----------



## Bernster (27 November 2020)

Would this impact drag hunting though?  Surely not?  ☹️


----------



## Tiddlypom (28 November 2020)

Bernster said:



			Would this impact drag hunting though?  Surely not?  ☹️
		
Click to expand...

It’s got to be a possibility.

It would be much simpler to impose an outright ban on all hunting with hounds than to try to twiddle with the Hunting Act to allow trail hunting to continue but making it more difficult for illegal hunting to take place.

Now the determination by the Hunting Office to circumvent the Hunting Act has been laid bare, anything could happen.

Bloodhounds (hunting the clean boot) would IMHO be the safest version, as it’s the most easy to police. But who knows.


----------



## ycbm (28 November 2020)

Bloodhounds and a runner are a slower game  than fox hounds with scent laid by a runner and a much slower day than when the scent is laid by horses instead of having to wait for a runner. There's no need for drag hunting to disappear.  

I've been with drag hunts, two in particular for lengthy spells and I've never seen a sab. I think it's quite easy for "trail hunting" to becomeas free of sabs as drag packs. (Yes I do know there have been isolated incidents of idiots sabbing a drag,  they were stupid mistakes and rare).

First they need to lay a scent of sufficient strength to hold the hounds and stop them being diverted by fox scent. Second they need to train their hounds in recall to the same level as drag packs do.  I've seen drag packs pick up fox scent but they never got more than half a field before they were stopped.  Then they need to tell anyone who asks where the trail is  being laid.  If they give maps to the sabs the day before,  it won't be many outings before they are too bored to attend.  

The end of drag hunting will be the urbanisation of the countryside, I think,  not the stupidity of people continuing to hunt illegally.  
.


----------



## Flagstad (22 November 2021)

The Jokers Girl said:



*I've always avoided the hunting section of this forum as the amount of pro bloodsport hunt posters sickens me with how open and brazen they are*.  It's interesting to see that none of the cowardly hunters that usually post are posting on this thread defending the transcripts and explaining what was "actually"  meant. I hope this is the demise of the illegal bloodsport in the UK.  We can only hope.
		
Click to expand...

To be fair, this is Horse & HOUND.

Old post, I know, but maybe you're still here?


----------

