Our views on
                                                  Hunting with Dogs

About half the area of the Guildford Constituency is rural, and living there are a small number of hunt enthusiasts. Occasionally we receive letters from them trying to make a case for hunting with dogs.

The principal hunt in this area is the Surrey Union based in Ockley. They hunt over a wide area in rural Guildford and adjacent constituencies, sometimes joining with the Chiddingfold, Leconfield and Cowdray hunt. They hunt at least twice a week during the season from the beginning of November until March, and they start cubbing in September. The police encourage the hunt not to dig out foxes when hunt saboteurs are present.
They claim now to be hunting within the law. We would like to be sure that is true.

To sum up our position at the start, we have always regarded hunting wild animals with dogs, a cruel and barbaric activity that should have no place in a civilised society.
On this page, we examine some of the claims that were made by the pro-hunting lobby and whether any have been born out now that the ban is in place.

Countryside Guardians?

Pest Control

Rural Job Losses

What about the horses?

Town versus Country

Sport or barbarism?

The hunters claimed that

• they are guardians of the countryside, they keep it nice for our enjoyment
  
• they are acting as (self-appointed) pest control officers
  
• hunting has a beneficial effect on the rural economy
  
• if it was banned there will be thousands of job losses
  
• a ban would result in thousands of horses and hounds being put down
  
• this is a town versus country issue - the townies don't understand rural life
  
• it is just a sport like any other sport.

Guardians of the countryside
In the last 50 years we have lost

• 95% of traditional hay meadows
• 99% of lowland heaths
• 80% of chalk downlands
• 80% of limestone grasslands
• 80% of fens and mires
• 90% of lowland ponds
• 50% of ancient lowland woods
• 150,000 miles of hedgerows. 

There are about 80 species of birds, 60 species of plants and 40 species of animals that are classed as endangered.

Many hunters are farmers and large landowners. They claim that they have been protecting the countryside  - but the statistics above show otherwise.

Pest control
By killing foxes, the hunters claim that they are protecting farm animals.

In fact, the number of foxes killed annually by the hunt is only about 8%.

DEFRA considers fox predation of sheep negligible. In rough hill areas 1 in 5 lambs die shortly after birth from exposure, starvation and disease - about 3 million lambs. There are no foxes on the Isle of Mull, but the death rate of lambs is similar to that of mainland Scotland.
The death rate of chickens through sickness and other reasons is 9 times higher than through fox predation.

Fox hunting was banned for 9 months during the foot & mouth epidemic but there was no evidence of the fox population getting out of hand and causing problems to livestock.
The ban has NOT resulted us being overwhelmed by foxes.

The rural economy & job losses
The Burns report showed that the 300 or so fox, hare and deer hunts contribute very little to the rural economy.
The likely number of job losses throughout the UK if hunting with dogs is banned would be about 1000 (3 full-time jobs per hunt).

We predicted that there would be negligible job losses if hunting was banned and that is how it has turned out.

When millions of workers in industry and the public services were being put out of work by Mrs.Thatcher, we didn't notice any objections from the hunting lobby.

Threat to horses and hounds
The hunters claimed that up to one million horses will be destroyed if there is a ban.

There are only 600,000 horses in the UK of which about 40,000 (6.7%) are used for hunting.

A ban would result in 20,000 hounds being put down - the hunters claimed.
The average pack consists of 60 dogs, which are normally shot at 6 years of age (1/2 their usual life expectancy). So they do not have much regard for their dogs.
Now there is a switch to drag hunting there is NO evidence that more horses or hounds have been destroyed.

It's only a sport
If you regard sport as a contest between equal adversaries, then using 40-60 dogs (specially trained to savage foxes) together with 40 - 80 horses to chase and frighten the life out of one fox is neither fair nor humane. Add to that the terrier men who dig out foxes that have gone to earth. A further part of the pantomime, now officially banned, is the ceremony of 'blooding', in which new hunters (some quite young children) at their first kill are smeared with the fox's blood. It gives a clear picture of a ritualistic slaughter reminiscent of feudal times, and all this run by characters dressed up in Christmas card costumes.

We call it a barbaric amusement not a sport and regard the ban as a success