POWA Press letters

POWA Press letters

Archive of POWA mailings to the papers

27-12-11 In the wake of the Boxing Day meets and Farming Minister Jim Paice's call for repeal of the Hunting Act, POWA wrote to national, regional and local newspapers as follows:-

Dear Sir,

Protect Our Wild Animals [POWA] urges the Prime Minister to reject the call for repeal of the Hunting Act by Farming Minister Jim 'Kill the Badgers' Paice and to denounce and clamp down on the 'cynical subterfuge' being employed by Hunts nationwide to flout the spirit and letter of the ‘ban' on hunting with hounds.

Many Hunts exploit weak enforcement and the Act's many loopholes to chase and kill live quarry much as they did pre-ban. They pretend to be using certain exemptions or 'Trail Hunting', pretend they lost control of their hounds by 'accident' every time they are seen chasing forbidden quarry.

Among other incidents in December:- a fox was 'accidentally' chased into a family's garden in Essex and bludgeoned to death feet from the horrified residents [police said there was nothing they could do] ; a beloved cat was 'trail hunted' to death by N.Yorkshire Hunts, its corpse contemptuously returned days later in a dog food bag; and a fox was 'trail hunted' through a housing estate and on to a major road in Shropshire, in another 'freak accident'.

The 'cynical subterfuge' a judge recently condemned Fernie FH hunters for using in trying to hide their crimes is actually widespread, with many Hunts arrogantly mocking the authorities and the popular will.

They behave as though above the law, as inner-city gangs did in August. Like looters, these rural gangsters should be brought to heel. When criminals circumvent the law, it's strengthened to stop them, not repealed to reward them.

Regrettably, most of the media, by tending to show only 'chocolate box' images of Hunt meets, not only disguise the cruel truth from the public but comfort the lawless.

Images of the brutal and sordid reality of hunting, its 'sharp end', where terrified and exhausted wild animals are ripped at by slavering dogs urged on by excited hunters, would send soaring the proportion of the public wanting these barbaric activities properly banned, even above its present 3-1*. Then, perhaps, those who should know better would stop, openly or tacitly, supporting this vile and vicious 'sport'.

------------------------------------

Notes for editors:-

References to all specific incidents above, and many other instances of outrageous and violent behaviour by supposedly ‘law-abiding' hunts can be found on POWA's Hunting News website page.

* Poll published 26-12-11 by YouGov for League Against Cruel Sports

This letter is known to have been published in:- London Metro, Western Daily Press, Western Morning News, Bristol Evening Post, Staffs Newsletter, Wirral Globe, York Press. Newcastle Star

17-11-11 POWA responded to a letter from James Barrington, 'Animal welfare consultant' to the CA, arguing that hunting wth hounds is 'natural' and 'humane' and the Hunting Act should be repealed:-

Mr. Barrington knows there is nothing remotely 'natural' or 'humane' about the hunting of live quarry with hounds. It saddens me to see a man I once worked with and admired debasing himself by spouting Hunt propaganda, presumably for reward. Recently, a Judge spoke of the 'cynical subterfuge' Fernie fox hunt employees used trying to disguise their crimes. But everyone should know that both the conduct and defence of hunting with dogs nowadays rests almost wholly on 'cynical subterfuge'.

These 'sports' are designed to maximise the length of the chase - up to 90 minutes for fox and hare hunting, 7 hours for deer - using slow but high-stamina dogs. How 'natural' or 'humane' is that? And yet – cynical subterfuge – fox hunting is presented almost as a kindly euthanasia society for 'old and sick' foxes.

As a monitor, I have witnessed Hunts of such enormous lengths; seen the desperate attempts of the victims to escape the baying hounds; seen their pitiful descents into utter exhaustion; seen the hideous, bloody, sometimes screaming, finale as they are finally caught. How 'natural' or 'humane' is that?

I have seen foxes and hares struggling to escape while being ripped at randomly by the lead dogs, until they are overwhelmed and die of blood loss or shock due to disembowelling through multiple bites. How 'natural' or 'humane' is that?

I have often seen a stag or a hind, perhaps earlier brutally separated an at-foot calf, unable to run further, turning to face the hounds, flanks heaving and steaming, legs trembling, eyes rolling, until the Huntsman strides up and blasts it into merciful oblivion with, if it's lucky, a single shot. How 'natural' or 'humane' is that?

I've also witnessed the stop-at-nothing fanaticism of hunters and the nauseating and deeply disturbing glee exhibited by riders or followers 'lucky' enough to be in at the kill. Watched them wait at a 'dig out' of a fox, whilst the terrier conducts fights with the victim, seen their excitement as the brutish terrierman reaches the hapless, hiding fox, yanks it out by its scruff and, if it's lucky - shoots it dead. How 'natural' or 'humane' is that?

I've watched as supporters rush to the scene of a deer kill, even carrying tiny children, to witness it's bloody dismembering and the handing out of body parts as 'trophies'. Such sickening behaviour may be 'natural' to the brutish and perverted followers of these 'sports', who clearly delight in their victims' suffering and death, but it is anything but 'natural' to normal people - and to link such behaviour to the word 'humane' is itself perverse.

But Mr.Barrington is right saying the Hunting Act [which another traitor,Tony Blair, has confessed to having 'sabotaged'] isn't working properly. It’s failing partly because of lack of enforcement, partly because of Hunts’ ruthless and ‘cynical subterfuge’, but mostly because of the Act's lax wording and numerous loopholes. Hunts can carry on much as before, with little fear of investigation, let alone prosecution. Pretending to be 'trail hunting', many still chase quarry for fun, still endanger their own animals and the public by charging on to roads and railways, still menace and savage livestock and pets - and one or more of their gang members is usually ready to assault or intimidate anyone trying to stop or expose them.

Barrington and his paymasters, and the Prime Minister and his hunting cronies are, knowingly or not, conniving in what the League Against Cruel Sports has described as a 'national criminal conspiracy' to ignore the Act and flout the rule of law. They want to remove even what little protection wild animals now have from being hunted for 'sport'. But the vast majority of people - urban and rural - still want these cruel and barbaric sports properly banned. When criminals circumvent the law, it must be strengthened to stop them not repealed to reward them.

yours faithfully, Alan Kirby, Associate. Protect Our Wild Animals [POWA] The letter has, so far, been published almost in full in the St.Ives Times & Echo and in edited form by the Western Daily Press and the Derby Telegraph

29-9-11 POWA responded to news that the Government had approved an NVQ component on hunting kennels with a Round Robin press letter:-
Though better training for workers dealing with animals is usually welcome, the Government-approved new element of an NVQ in 'Animal Care' that is 'relevant to working in Hunt kennels' seems a grotesque and hypocritical contradiction in terms. Hunt kennels are centres at which packs of dogs are trained to terrorise and kill defenceless wild animals for the amusement of their followers. It's an open secret that many Hunts continue to do this by shamelessly exploiting the weaknesses, loopholes and lax enforcement of the Hunting Act. Is this 'Animal Care'? Then there are the pets and livestock regularly chased, mauled or killed by out-of-control Hunt hounds, and the frequency with which put their own dogs [and the public] at risk by allowing them to run on to roads, railways and other hazards, sometimes resulting in injury and/or death. Is this 'Animal Care'? Hunt Kennels habitually and ruthlessly dispose of the hounds they so purport to 'love' - mostly with a bullet in the head - when they are deemed old to hunt [at about half their natural life span]; and younger hounds face the same risk if judged sub-standard. Protect Our Wild Animals, using hunter-provided data, calculates that Hunts probably 'cull' over 9,000 hounds annually. Indeed, if the Act has reduced the number of wild animals they're able to slaughter for fun, the largest victim group of Hunts could well now be their own dogs. Is this 'Animal Care'? No amount of NVQ certificates will paper over the inherent cruelty of Hunts and hunters. We need the Act to be strengthened to properly arrest their awful abuses of both wild and domestic animals, not repealed to reward their ruthless rapacity.

This letter was published in:- the Western Daily Press, the South Wales Echo, the York Press, the Bristol Ev. Post, the Western Mail, Tribune, the Shepton Mallet Journal and the Derby Telegraph

1-9-11 POWA responded to vitriolic and largely mendacious hunt supporter comments and letters following Ann Widdecombe's praise of hunt monitors in her Daily Express column the day before. To:- Daily Express, 1-9-11

I write to rebut the calumnies from hunt supporters heaped upon Monitors in comments & letters to the Express, following Ann Widdecombe's piece [31-8] rightly praising them.

It is an open secret that the Hunting Act is widely flouted and its loopholes ruthlessly exploited by gangs of bloodsport fanatics called 'Hunts', with our hard-pressed police unable, or in some cases apparently unwilling, to act against them. The latter can surely not be connected to the facts that the Policing Minister is a former Countryside Alliance official who was Master of a hare-hunting pack for many years, and that the Prime Minister has fox-hunted, remains very close to that fraternity and promised, as his first policy commitment as Party Leader, to repeal the, highly popular, Hunting Act that affronts his friends.

So, Monitors go out, at great personal inconvenience, cost and risk, to try to catalogue Hunts' continuing abuse of the letter and spirit of the law, and of both their mammal victims and of the dogs and horses they exploit as tools to engage in their foul fun. There are many instances of hunters' aggression and abuse posted on YouTube. Unlike sabs, whose aim is to protect the quarry, Monitors do not interfere with Hunts' activities, but they still meet with routine obstruction, abuse, threats and violence. It is unsurprising that those who gain pleasure from pursuing and slaughtering living creatures readily display great aggression towards people seeking to expose their wrongdoing or protect their animal victims. Or that they barrage the public with utter falsehoods - unbacked by documentary evidence - about their own 'sport' and the behaviour of the valiant few who stand against them.

I have catalogued data on the criminal transgressions of hunters and supporters for 20 years. Though only a fraction of the, often unprovable, offences reported as committed by them, and not covering the havoc they frequently wreak, I have just short of 300 separate hunters and supporters recorded as receiving criminal sanctions, mostly for offences against Monitors and sabs, involving over 400 offences. These include Masters [46], Huntsmen [37], other Hunt staff [63], riders and followers.

The list includes 162 offences involving violence by hunters [some very serious], 51 against monitors, 73 against sabs; 39 of Criminal Damage, mostly of equipment and vehicles belonging to 'antis'; and, 45 Public Order offences, mostly threatening/abusive behaviour. 10 from these categories are offences involving the Heythrop, the favourite Hunt of Mr.Cameron and his mates in the 'Chipping Norton Set'. As far as I know, no Monitor has ever been found guilty of such behaviour towards hunters.

The Hunting Act needs to be strengthened to really stop this barbaric 'sport', not repealed.

yours faithfully, Alan Kirby, M.Sc, Associate of Protect Our Wild Animals [POWA]

7-7-11 POWA responded to an article in the Lancs Telegraph with this letter:-

It is good that E.Lancs police found it helpful to at last deploy the 6 year old Hunting Act, by bringing a pair of lowlife wild animal abusers to justice [Telegraph, 5-7]. However, such 'poaching' was already illegal, and often prosecuted, before 2005.

The Hunting Act was primarily designed [by public demand] to address the blatant, systematised, barbaric and mass cruelty of organised Hunts and Hare Coursing events [e.g.the appalling Waterloo Cup].

While the Act eliminated the latter horror by an absolute ban, it has proved very much less effective against hunting with hounds. Many Hunts have ruthlessly exploited its weaknesses - and subsequent lack of effort against them by the police - to flout the spirit and letter of the law, knowing it is very unlikely they'll even be investigated. The obvious solution is to strengthen the Act - not to repeal it as Cameron has promised to do, as a favour for his bloodsports-loving friends.

Maybe then Forces would at least try to enforce the Act against Hunts, instead of largely leaving it a handful of poorly-resourced and vulnerable volunteer monitors.

Maybe... but police attitudes to wildlife abuse seem typified by the police Wildlife Officer quoted in your article, who, I imagine honestly, thinks they are 'working tirelessly to protect Lancashire's wildlife' by co-operating closely with serial wildlife abusers and killers like BASC and gamekeepers.

It seems police, prosecutors and legislators all still need to be educated in the need to apply the same zeal to the abuse of animals by the well-heeled and influential as they do to underclass louts who infringe their 'property' interests.

Or shall we be stuck for ever singing the old refrain 'It's the rich wot gets the pleasure, it's the poor wot gets the blame', while the continuing victims of unpoliced Hunts thrash and scream as the hounds grasp them in their jaws ?

yours faithfully, Alan Kirby, Protect Our Wild Animals

-----------------------

24-6-11 POWA sent the following to national, regional and city daily papers in England & Wales:-

Sir, The media seem baffled as to why the Government were so determined not to concede a ban on wild animals in circuses. Have they really not noticed that Cameron's Conservatives [with some honourable exceptions] are still very much the 'nasty party' when it comes to animal abuse?

Though wisely keeping quiet about it now, the PM is still passionate about restoring the 'right' of his pals to harry and kill wild mammals for fun, by repealing the Hunting Act at some point. Not only is the bloodsports lobby an inner-core Tory constituency, but the Party is in serious hock to it for mountainous donations and electoral aid.

If No.10 is really willing to 'bribe' and 'threaten' MPs over the relatively minor issue of a few dozen circus animals, to what lengths will they go [are they going] to further their perverse but totemic desire to restore the barbarity of unbridled hunting with hounds?

Yours faithfully, Alan Kirby, Protect Our Wild Animals [POWA]
To our knowledge, letter published in:- Western Mail, Eastern Daily Press, Coventry Ev. Telegraph, Tribune

[Earlier POWA Press letters yet to be uploaded]

Enter supporting content here

Contact details - enquiries@powa.org.uk

Protect Our Wild Animals Limited is a Private Limited Company, registered in England & Wales, number 6687073, registered address 101 Ely Road, Llandaff, Cardiff, CF5 2BZ

Disclaimer: Neither POWA nor the Webmaster necessarily endorse all the views expressed on this site or the views expressed in links/downloads on this site. Responsibility cannot be accepted by POWA or the webmaster for statements made by contributors for publication on this site or on those sites/downloads to which links are given.