# Is the Baroness losing the plot?



## Burnsall (31 October 2006)

Hunters really are getting desperate.
From The Western Daily Press

________________________________________

The president of the Countryside Alliance accused a former West MP of influencing a police investigation into alleged illegal hunting to wreak revenge on the hunting community for getting her voted out. 

Labour peer Baroness Ann Mallalieu levelled the astonishing claim at RSPCA director general and ex-Taunton MP Jackie Ballard at a stormy meeting of hunting folk and police chiefs on Exmoor yesterday.

The RSPCA has angrily dismissed the allegation as "absurd".

While the meeting was ostensibly called to voice anger over the way hunting leaders were arrested and dealt with by police investigating allegations, it was the motives behind the prosecution that have become the subject of controversy.

Baroness Mallalieu, a barrister who rides with the Devon and Somerset Staghounds (DSSH), stuck by her conspiracy theory claim yesterday, demanding to know the details of meetings between anti-hunt campaigners and police chiefs in the run-up to a decision taken earlier this month to mount the first public prosecution of a hunt for breaching the ban.

The allegations against the DSSH were originally dismissed by Avon and Somerset Police, but were controversially reopened in the wake of the successful prosecution of Tony Wright of the neighbouring Exmoor Fox Hounds.

SHE told the public meeting yesterday that police chiefs and officers had told her the case was reopened after pressure from the RSPCA and other groups, and that it was "no coincidence" that all three prosecutions for breaching the hunt ban had been against hunts in Ms Ballard's former constituency.

The ex-Liberal Democrat MP made a name for herself as an outspoken anti-hunt campaigner. She was defeated in the 2001 General Election after a major mobilisation of hunt supporters targeted her seat - and her loss was widely attributed to the hunting issue.

Within months, Ms Ballard was named chief executive of the RSPCA, and the society moved further towards an anti-hunt agenda. It formed the Campaign for the Hunted Animal with the League against Cruel Sports and IFAW, a pact which helped bring about the hunt ban of 2005.

Baroness Mallalieu told the packed meeting in Exford yesterday: "Avon and Somerset Police have been unduly influenced by pressure from animal rights campaigners. The normal independent decision-making has succumbed to political pressure."

She said: "I can think of no other instance where partisan organisations are allowed an involvement in this way. It is no coincidence that all three prosecutions that have been mounted involve video evidence, all three were rejected initially by the police and all three are in Jackie Ballard's former constituency. All three are on hunts which contributed to a task force which lost her her seat.

"The man handling the case, PC Stratton, told me this case had been submitted back in May or June and was dismissed, but it was pressure from the RSPCA that led to it being reopened, and there was correspondence between Ms Ballard and the Avon and Somerset Constabulary.

"Until we see what has actually gone on, we won't know, but I would like to know," she said.

AT the meeting, Superintendent Gary Davies said he could not answer points about the case, but sought to reassure Exmoor residents that the police had learned from their handling of the arrests of three DSSH huntsmen and would take on board residents' concerns.

He said: "I am acutely aware how sensitive and emotive this issue is for you and I know we rely on your support. I understand the broad criticism you have today. We will adopt a new sensitive approach."

After the meeting, the RSPCA said in a statement: "The idea that the RSPCA would act to see an animal welfare law upheld purely for personal or vindictive reasons is absurd.

"The RSPCA called, on cruelty grounds, for a ban on hunting with dogs for many decades before the appointment of Jackie Ballard as director general. Since the Hunting Act was passed, the society has been consistent in calling for the law to be enforced.

"While the RSPCA, as the major prosecutor of animal welfare crimes in England and Wales has the respect of the police, we cannot determine their actions in investigating," the statement added.


----------



## Ereiam_jh (31 October 2006)

Sorry what's your point.  That's just a cut and pasted press article.

BTW best to just provide a link, you're infringing copyright pasting the whole article.

Then again who cares about the law?


----------



## Burnsall (31 October 2006)

I'm relieved you haven't resorted to even more personal abuse. Perhaps you're learning to play to ball, not the man.


----------



## Ereiam_jh (31 October 2006)

Why do you accuse me of chasing deer with dogs to exhaustion?  What grounds to you have for thinking I am the sort of person that would do that?


----------



## Maesfen (31 October 2006)

Shame the rspca (capitols not required for them!) do not now have the respect of the majority of the animal owning public though?

Ask a law abiding country dweller (and not just down on Exmoor) what they now think of the police and their responses to normal issues and can almost guarantee their  answer will be 'not much'.  They too have lost our respect for their actions - or non actions - long before this; they are a joke to a lot of the countryside now.    That is unforgiveable and not entirely the bobby on the beat's fault, he can only do what he is allowed to do not what he knows he should do.


----------



## Burnsall (31 October 2006)

If you have a problem with my posts either PM me about it or reserve your complaints for discrete posts so that threads like this don't become clogged up with irrelevant messages. Thank you so much in advance.


----------



## Burnsall (31 October 2006)

Do you agree with the Baroness's allegations about the RSPCA?


----------



## Ereiam_jh (31 October 2006)

You've stated that I am the sort of person who would chase a red deer to exhaustion.  You obviously felt this was a relevant comment to the hunting debate.

Why did you say that.  What grounds do you have for thinking that?

If you have none then why don't you just say that and we can move on.

I've never chased a deer to the point of exhaustion.

I'm not complaining I'm just asking you a question.

And I'll post where I like about what I like.

I'll also chase whatever animal I like with however many dogs I like and how far I like.


----------



## Burnsall (31 October 2006)

If you get a thrill out of the thought of deer being chased to the point of exhaustion that's a matter for you and your conscience. 

Please restrict your posts here to the theme in hand and remember to play the ball not the man. Thank you so much.


----------



## Ereiam_jh (31 October 2006)

What makes you think I get a thrill out of the thought of such a thing.

I'm replying to this theme:
"If you get a thrill out of the thought of deer being chased to the point of exhaustion that's a matter for you and your conscience. "


----------



## Maesfen (31 October 2006)

Do you agree with the Baroness's allegations about the RSPCA?
		
Click to expand...

Absolutely.  
We (meaning all, not just the Baroness and I!) have no reason to doubt that they are capable of anything, even getting into bed with law breakers and criminals to further their own end with a political agenda; they are not worried about animal cruelty in the real sense of the word.  
They are pretty much useless now at prevention of cruelty to any animal, not only those that are a hunted species even when cases are handed to them on a plate and that is to my personal knowledge, not just hearsay.


----------



## Burnsall (31 October 2006)

You don't think the RSPCA does anything good at all?


----------



## Ereiam_jh (31 October 2006)

A lot less good now than before they got into animal rights rather than animal wefare.  IMO.


----------



## AlanE (31 October 2006)

Burnsall, what is your point? Ann Mallalieu is acting on evidence. Ms Ballard is just the sort of person to misuse her position in the way described, or don't you agree?


----------



## Burnsall (31 October 2006)

Accusing someone of misusing their position as head of a major charity is a serious allegation. I hope anyone doing this can back it up.


----------



## Maesfen (31 October 2006)

You don't think the RSPCA does anything good at all?
		
Click to expand...

They're still very good at rattling cans under old people's noses and relying on their glory days when they would have put themselves out to stop cruelty but they're not much use now IMO.  Their 'inspectors' around here are a pretty useless bunch who just  strut and posture to glory in the uniform; ask them for help and they do not want to know.  At Beeston Market alone to my knowledge they are a disgrace and useless.


----------



## Ereiam_jh (31 October 2006)

"Accusing someone of misusing their position as head of a major charity is a serious allegation. I hope anyone doing this can back it up. "

Accusing people of 'being the sort of person" who enjoy chasing deer to the point of exhaustion is a serious accusation.  I hope you can back it up.


----------



## JACQSZOO (31 October 2006)

"Accusing someone of misusing their position as head of a major charity is a serious allegation. I hope anyone doing this can back it up. "

Accusing people of 'being the sort of person" who enjoy chasing deer to the point of exhaustion is a serious accusation.  I hope you can back it up.
		
Click to expand...

&lt;yawn&gt; talk about tedious.  Are you incapable of taking part in a discussion without constantly harping on about chasing deer?


----------



## Burnsall (31 October 2006)

Maesfenhorse, I hope I don't sound aggressive - I'm just curious: in what way are the RSPCA people at Beeston Market a disgrace? Are they poorly trained?


----------



## Ereiam_jh (31 October 2006)

Burnsall makes completely unsubstantiated and unjustified claims about people.  It strikes me it's then a little hypocritical of him to imply there's something wrong with doing that.

No doubt if people made claims about you that were completely false then you'd want to defend yourself.


----------



## JACQSZOO (31 October 2006)

Change the bl00dy record.  Its tedious.


----------



## AlanE (31 October 2006)

Burnsall, I take it by your comments that you are 'anti'. Curious that you make the above statement when the Mallalieu one was made in front of the police and hundreds of people at a public meeting. Bear in mind that she is also a Barrister &amp; QC...

But your traits seem to be common in antis. It never occurs to them that someone else may have thought about a subject in greater depth than themselves! This anti arrogance would be laughable if it wasn't so harmful.


----------



## Ereiam_jh (31 October 2006)

All you seem to do JAQ is post about how bored you are.

Couldn't you go and be bored elsewhere?


----------



## Ereiam_jh (31 October 2006)

I think that the Bronness is quite right to raise concerns.  Ballard is a politician in charge of a charity.  It's illegal for the RSPCA to engage in politics and there are very real concerns that they do.

Animal rights IS politics.


----------



## JACQSZOO (31 October 2006)

All you seem to do JAQ is post about how bored you are.

Couldn't you go and be bored elsewhere?
		
Click to expand...

Not at all - I find these boards quite interesting in the main - I just find some of your post very tedious, which is a great shame as I am sure you have some very interesting views that would make very interesting reading.


----------



## Burnsall (31 October 2006)

You must learn to play the ball and not the man (or woman).


----------



## Ereiam_jh (31 October 2006)

No Burnsall, engaging with someone's posts IS playing the ball.  That's what I am doing.

You on the other hand make unsubstantiated personal comments about people that you can't back up.


----------



## Burnsall (31 October 2006)

Like Giles, you resort to personal attacks rather than debating. 

The bottom line is that the police have to enforce the law. Pros have been crowing for a long time that they're flouting the ban without the police doing anything about it. Now, in the face of overwhelming evidence - much of it gloatingly advertised by hunters themselves - that the law is being ignored, the police have arrested just two men (who of course might subsequently be cleared of all charges). This has resulted in hysterical and unwise accusations from the likes of the pulchritudinous Mallalieu. 

You've only got yourselves to blame: you should have stuck to your policy of shiftily breaking the law in secret rather than screaming about it from the rooftops.


----------



## Ereiam_jh (31 October 2006)

The police have a discretion as to whether they enforce the law or not.  I've checked with them about this and they let me break the hunting ban.  

Others can do so too.  

It all depends how you break it and who you are as to whether you can get away with it.

Bad laws can only be enforced partially and unequally.


----------



## Maesfen (31 October 2006)

Maesfenhorse, I hope I don't sound aggressive - I'm just curious: in what way are the RSPCA people at Beeston Market a disgrace? Are they poorly trained?
		
Click to expand...

When I last went there they were blatantly ignoring horses that were in no fit state to travel; a horse can come in with aladdin type feet and not even say anything to the owner; they don't bother if something has a runny nose, that's just to start with.  They turn a blind eye to all of those things and a lot more; they are not doing the job they are meant to be doing which is preventing cruelty and ignorance.  They ignore people who have questioned a horse's condition which is very disheartening, especially when the people complaining are very knowledgable ones (not me but local dealers, know far more about it than I could ever do).  They just do not want to become involved. 
That is what I mean about them not doing their job properly.   As it's some time since I have been there I would be delighted if someone could tell me they have cleaned up their act a bit, it certainly needed it.


----------



## Hercules (31 October 2006)

''You've only got yourselves to blame: you should have stuck to your policy of shiftily breaking the law in secret rather than screaming about it from the rooftops.''

Why?  It is the duty of every decent man to stand up and be counted if he believes that something is wrong.

The problem here Burnsall, is that you and your sort know little about either duty or decency.


----------



## Burnsall (31 October 2006)

Thank you very much for replying. I don't quite understand the context in which this happened - was it a horse market? If so, the RSPCA officers should obviously be "horse-literate" which they didn't seem to be from what you saw.


----------



## Burnsall (31 October 2006)

I don't see what purpose can be achieved by copying Giles and AlanE and launching another personal attack. I know it's an emotive subject but please try to debate the issues rather than dishing out childish insults.


----------



## Ereiam_jh (31 October 2006)

This is just a tactic not to address what people are saying to you.  

Accuse everyone of being personal rather than responding to the substantive points they are making.

The mirror image of Karl's method which is to avoid what people are saying to you by insulting them instead.

No doubt you'd characterise this as a childish personal attack too.


----------



## AlanE (31 October 2006)

Burnsall, you seem to have some arcane and perverted view of the situation.

Look, the hunts are following the law, but taking advantage of the opportunities within the Act for various forms of exempt hunting to continue.

You don't seem to realise that the Exmoor meeting was, strictly speaking, nothing to do with hunting, but was to do with the way the police had acted in this case, and why. Something is very wrong if the Police start to single out people just because they are asked to do so by the immensely wealthy 'animal rights' lobby. Just as an aside, the RSPCA do a good job with domestic animals, but we do know that their controlling council is now run by people with links to some questionable organizations. If you are one of their gullible cannon-fodder, Please take the trouble to find out something about them: you will find that they are fuelled by hatred of people and not a desire to better animal welfare. If that were the case, then they would be supporting traditional hunting with hounds.

Incidentally, the phrase 'hysterical and unwise' is not one which I would connect with Mallalieu  at ANY time!


----------



## Ereiam_jh (31 October 2006)

He won't debate with you AlanE, he'll just accuse you of launching a personal attack.


----------



## Burnsall (31 October 2006)

"Something is very wrong if the Police start to single out people just because they are asked to do so by the immensely wealthy 'animal rights' lobby."

Please provide evidence that this is what happened when the police arrested the two men from the stag hunt. You appear to be impugning the integrity of the police now.

It isn't even as if the men have been found guilty. When their cases are heard they may be proved innocent. It's time for any wise hunter to keep his head during this difficult time when all about you (including the delightful Baroness) are losing theirs...


----------



## Ereiam_jh (31 October 2006)

It's a test case because they don't know what the law is.  No one knows what the reasonable steps are that the hunt has to use to shoot the stags.  

I read what you were saying before as that there were no reasonable steps they could take.

And yet it's vital that the stags have to be shot, or is it?

Until they've worked it out they should break the law by refusing to shoot the deer altogether.


----------



## Eagle_day (31 October 2006)

"He won't debate with you AlanE, he'll just accuse you of launching a personal attack."


No, even worse: he'll misquote Kipling. Unforgiveable.


----------



## Burnsall (31 October 2006)

Not misquoted - lovingly adapted...


----------



## Eagle_day (31 October 2006)

Really? I didn't think people loved Kipling these days.


----------



## Burnsall (31 October 2006)

He was named after Rudyard Lake in (I think) Staffordshire, you know, where he was conceived.


----------



## wurzel (31 October 2006)

"Do you agree with the Baroness's allegations about the RSPCA?"

As one who was at the meeting....I do!


----------



## Burnsall (1 November 2006)

It's a relief to know that you were present to lend a voice of reason to the proceedings!


----------



## wurzel (1 November 2006)

You are interested in the subject (enough to force your ideas on us), but you couldn't be arsed to attend ?


----------



## Burnsall (1 November 2006)

How do I force my ideas on you? I'm merely contributing to an internet forum. If you feel that I'm forcing myself on you please feel free to use the "ignore" facility to prevent any further discomfort.

Why should I attend a meeting I had no idea was taking place in a place hundreds of miles away from where I live?


----------



## wurzel (1 November 2006)

"How do I force my ideas on you? I'm merely contributing to an internet forum. If you feel that I'm forcing myself on you please feel free to use the "ignore" facility to prevent any further discomfort."

I think you know what i mean.

"Why should I attend a meeting I had no idea was taking place in a place hundreds of miles away from where I live? "


Because you are anti and sound like an expert on the subject.

But you just couldn't be arsed to come !!

I don't believe you really give a toss about hunting deer.

Have you ever been?


----------



## Burnsall (2 November 2006)

I don't know what you mean, no. Please explain how I'm forcing my ideas on you.

How can I attend a meeting I knew nothing about? Explain that as well.


----------



## wurzel (2 November 2006)

"I don't know what you mean, no. Please explain how I'm forcing my ideas on you."

Hunting. Must I stop it or not. Do you even care?

I know you can't physically stop me.


"How can I attend a meeting I knew nothing about? Explain that as well. "

Well how much do you care about hunting deer on Exmoor?

I thought you would be following the latest news. 

Tell us what you really know about Stag hunting. Come on, something you can't get off the net.

What was the last DSSH meet you sabbed?


----------



## Burnsall (3 November 2006)

"Tell us what you really know about Stag hunting."

OK. With the "traditional" form of hunting harbourers selected the stag to be hunted before the chase. This creature was then separated from the herd and chased literally to the point of exhaustion. This process lasted an average of three hours but could extend up to seven. At this point the stag would be surrounded by haying hounds, some of which would perhaps bite it, even though they're trained not to. Then some immensely self-important knobhead, thinking he was John Wayne, Robin Hood and Bruce Willis rolled into one, would heroically step forward and pump a bullet into the stag. Squeals of rejoicing from the attendant throng would ensue.

The alternative is to stalk the stag and shoot it, without the need for a chase, as used to happen to 85% of the deer on Exmoor.


----------



## Hercules (3 November 2006)

Burnsall,

Youhave obviously read a couple of articles about stag hunting (clearly they are not totally accurate), but what is your practical knowledge and experience of stag hunting?  I think we all know the answer to that one.

''The alternative is to stalk the stag and shoot it, without the need for a chase, as used to happen to 85% of the deer on Exmoor.''

Wrong.  85% of the deer CULLED on Exmoor may have been shot.  However, as a result of this ban 85% of the HERD will be shot.  A huge difference.


----------



## Burnsall (3 November 2006)

Which part of my description of hunting is incorrect? Enlighten me

FACT: 85% of deer on Exmoor which were culled were simply shot, without being chased.


----------



## wurzel (3 November 2006)

"FACT: 85% of deer on Exmoor which were culled were simply shot, without being chased. "

Fact? I own part of Exmoor and I can with confidence tell you it is NOT fact.

Who did the shooting ?


----------



## wurzel (3 November 2006)

"At this point the stag would be surrounded by haying hounds, some of which would perhaps bite it, even though they're trained not to."

Haying hounds ?

I sense fingers of fury !!! 

Perhaps bite it? Yes perhaps. When did you last see this happen? And where?

"Then some immensely self-important knobhead, thinking he was John Wayne, Robin Hood and Bruce Willis rolled into one, would heroically step forward and pump a bullet into the stag."

Knobhead? Are you sure?

Who is a knobhead?


"Squeals of rejoicing from the attendant throng would ensue."

Throng? When did you last see a throng at a kill ?

Time and place will do.

"The alternative is to stalk the stag and shoot it, without the need for a chase, as used to happen to 85% of the deer on Exmoor."

Who did this?


----------



## Burnsall (3 November 2006)

These aren't my findings - they're those of Lord Burns in his report on hunting.


----------



## Hercules (3 November 2006)

Bellsall,

What I stated in my previous post was that maybe 85% (your statistic) of the CULLED deer on Exmoor were shot.  However, as a result of the intereference of your sort, 85% of the ENTIRE deer population on Exmoor will be shot.

That is not too great a difference to understand, is it?


----------



## jerryboy (3 November 2006)

Simply tell me why you must chase a stag to exhaustion before shooting it? That is what the staghound packs do.


----------



## Burnsall (4 November 2006)

From the LACS site:

The League has film of the Devon and Somerset Staghounds chasing a stag on NT land on Exmoor, shot this August. The stag was pursued for more than two hours. A member of the hunt is seen cracking his whip at the exhausted animal.

Tom Yandle, chairman of the Devon and Somerset Staghounds, subsequently quoted in the media 
I dont see how chasing the deer and riding alongside it and cracking a whip is any more inhumane than any other form of moving a deer around.


----------



## wurzel (4 November 2006)

I want to know what your findings are?

Not some dopey Lord !!


----------



## wurzel (4 November 2006)

Sure.

It is the best way to kill them.


plus


It is the only way we will tolerate deer. 

Its not a zoo.


----------

