Man cleared of fox hunting charge
Discussion
A huntsman from the Scottish Borders has been cleared of deliberately using hounds to hunt foxes in breach of anti-hunting legislation.
Trevor Adams, 46, from Melrose had denied that the hounds being used at a farm near Kelso in October 2002 were out of control.
He claimed they were used to "flush" out foxes known to be hiding in cover, so they could be shot.
JOB DONE - THE FIRST OF MANY COURT CASES AND EXCUSES THAT WILL ENSURE THIS BAN DOES NOT WORK IN ENGLAND EITHER.
Trevor Adams, 46, from Melrose had denied that the hounds being used at a farm near Kelso in October 2002 were out of control.
He claimed they were used to "flush" out foxes known to be hiding in cover, so they could be shot.
JOB DONE - THE FIRST OF MANY COURT CASES AND EXCUSES THAT WILL ENSURE THIS BAN DOES NOT WORK IN ENGLAND EITHER.
pdV6 said:
Yeah right
Yes of course he could be guilty as sin and lying but he's been found not guilty and so that's what has to be assumed in this case. No dead foxes found other than with bullet wounds and all completely devoid of chew marks.
If the regime is Scotland has changed so that instead of conventional hunts, the foxes are flushed out to be shot then the law seems to be working exactly as intended.
I've not read the legislation, and IANAL so probs wouldn't understand it anyway, but isn't it a ban on 'hunting with dogs'? He was hunting, part of the process (flushing the prey) was done using dogs, ergo 'hunting with dogs' bang to rights, [mode="bogush"]or have I got the wrong end of the stick again?[/mode]
BliarOut said:
The ban will never work.
It may take a while but like other similar bans it'll work eventually. It will criminalise those who decide to still partake and cut down the numbers significantly because some people just don't want to break the law. That is an important step.
It'll work, stop being daft
OK Mrs Fish you can close this now
BliarOut said:
mode=DieselEd 
He wasn't using the dogs to hunt, but to flush the foxes out. He then hunted the fox with a gun. All totally legal and above board.
Round one to the pro hunting brigade methinks.
With the exception that flushing out is specifically permitted in the exceptions section of the legislation. Difficult to see what round they've won as the ban remains precisely as it was intended and as it will be on Feb 18th.
Oh, and AFAIK he would have been convicted under the England ban because he was using twenty dogs and not two.
>> Edited by Control on Friday 10th December 14:32
einion yrth said:
I've not read the legislation, and IANAL so probs wouldn't understand it anyway, but isn't it a ban on 'hunting with dogs'? He was hunting, part of the process (flushing the prey) was done using dogs, ergo 'hunting with dogs' bang to rights,
There are exemptions for using dogs (no more than 2 in England I think) for flushing out only.
It's a long way from done and dusted yet. We still have the parliament act challenge to overcome down south.. Let's not forget how the pro lobby promised to follow Tony's election hopes very carefully too.
Besides, this sets the precedent that you can legally flush with dogs. Take a sniper along. As long as the cause of death is the bullet and not the dog, no crime.
The CPS are going to have to spend an awful lot of money on post mortems it would seem
Don't you dare Mrs F, he had the last word last time
Besides, this sets the precedent that you can legally flush with dogs. Take a sniper along. As long as the cause of death is the bullet and not the dog, no crime.
The CPS are going to have to spend an awful lot of money on post mortems it would seem
Don't you dare Mrs F, he had the last word last time
Jenny Taillier said:
Although good news it has shown that the complete wasted of Parliamentary time has produced unenforceable legislation.
I think the lentalist soap dodgers should be billed for the costs of this fiasco. What a waste of space.
At least the foxes are still getting killed.
I agree and the good news is that they are being shot, which means that lots of them will be wounded and escape, to die an agonising death of disease and starvation.
Good to know the bill was not passed to make the life of the foxes any better. How’s the festering wound there Basil.
Mrr T said:
Although good news it has shown that the complete wasted of Parliamentary time has produced unenforceable legislation.
I think the lentalist soap dodgers should be billed for the costs of this fiasco. What a waste of space.
At least the foxes are still getting killed.
I agree and the good news is that they are being shot, which means that lots of them will be wounded and escape, to die an agonising death of disease and starvation.
Good to know the bill was not passed to make the life of the foxes any better. How’s the festering wound there Basil.
Sorry to be utterly, utterly pedantic BUT
Animals in the wild do not die in their beds. It is ALWAYS from starvation or disease or predation or sundry other nasty ways.
BliarOut said:
It's a long way from done and dusted yet. We still have the parliament act challenge to overcome down south.. Let's not forget how the pro lobby promised to follow Tony's election hopes very carefully too.
Yeah but who really expects the questioning of an act of Parliament to work or some straw clutch at Human Rights? They have virtually no chance with either.
And why should Tony baby be worried about the pro lobby following his election campaign? These are not in the most part Labour voters we're talking about here and so they're just going to be voting the way they always did.
Right Mrs F
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff