Ten years ago today (18 November) the Hunting Act 2004 was forced through Parliament and three months later, on 18 February 2005 it became law. H&H reminds you of the important dates along the road to the ban coming into force…

1949

Two private members’ bills to ban or restrict hunting fail to make it onto the statute books.

1992

A private member’s bill to make hunting with dogs illegal is rejected by the Commons.

Labour MP Kevin McNamara proposed The Wild Mammals (Protection) Bill, which was defeated on its second reading.

1993

Tony Banks, a Labour MP and animal rights campaigner, failed to get his Fox Hunting (Abolition) Bill passed by Parliament.

1995

Another Labour MP, John McFall, fails with his private member’s bill to ban hunting. The Wild Mammals (Protection) Bill passes a second reading in the Commons before being heavily amended and falling in the Lords.

May 1997

The Labour Party wins the general election and in its manifesto promises a free vote in Parliament on hunting.

5 November 1997

Michael Foster MP publishes a private member’s bill to ban hunting with dogs.

1 March 1998

Countryside Rally in Hyde Park — 250,000 protest against the bill.

13 March 1998

The Foster bill runs out of time during the report stage in the Commons.

30 May 2000

Labour MP Gordon Prentice proposes an amendment to the Countryside and Rights of Way Bill to ban the sport.

28 February 2001

During a vote in the Commons, MPs vote by a majority of 179 for an outright ban.

26 March 2001

The House of Lords votes 317 to 68 against the ban. The hunting bill runs out of time when the general election is called.

June 2001

The Queen’s Speech promises another free vote on hunting in parliament.

February 2002

Scottish Parliament bans hunting in Scotland.

September 2002

400,000 join the Liberty and Livelihood March to support rural life.

3 December 2002

Alun Michael, the rural affairs minister, announces the Hunting Bill, allowing foxhunting under a strict licensing system, but which would outlaw hare coursing and stag hunting.

1 July 2003

After five hours of debate, MPs vote to change the Hunting Bill into an outright ban by 362 votes to 154.

10 July 2003

A third reading of the Hunting Bill clears the House of Commons, 317 votes to 145.

21 October 2003

A cross-party group of peers in the House of Lords throws out MPs’ plans for a complete ban and replaces them with a licensing regime for fox and stag hunting as well as hare coursing, during the committee stage. Anti-hunting MPs vote for a total ban on hunting with dogs in England and Wales, but the House of Lords rejects it in a vote before the legislation runs out of parliamentary time.

8 September 2004

Government announces plans for a free vote on the Hunting Bill — leading to an outright ban — before the session ends in November.

16 September 2004

MPs vote for a ban on hunting. A group of pro-hunt demonstrators break in to the House of Commons chamber while protestors are involved in confrontations outside Parliament.

18 November 2004

Commons speaker Michael Martin invokes the Parliament Act to push the bill into law despite the Lords rejecting the bill.

28 January 2005

A High Court challenge to the law is lost by pro-hunt campaigners.

16 February 2005

The Countryside Alliance loses its appeal that the Hunting Act is unlawful.

18 February 2005

The hunting ban comes into force.

This news story was first published in Horse & Hound magazine (13 November 2014).

Stay in touch with all the news in the run-up to and throughout the major shows and events during 2026 and beyond with a Horse & Hound subscription. Subscribe today for all you need to know ahead of these major events, plus online reports on the action as it happens from our expert team of reporters and in-depth analysis in our special commemorative magazines. Have a subscription already? Set up your unlimited website access now

As the 10th anniversary of the passing of the Hunting Act approaches — on 18 November — Vote-OK is warning hunting people not to be complacent about the current survival of virtually all hunts in England and Wales.

George Bowyer, Director of Vote-OK, says a new anti organisation, “Campaign to Strengthen the Hunting Act”, is a compelling reason why hunting people should work for a Conservative victory at the impending general election. David Cameron is the only party leader offering a vote on repeal of the Act.

“Under Labour, the current status quo is the ceiling from which we would be precariously hanging by our fingertips,” said Mr Bowyer.

Tim Bonner of the Countryside Alliance added: “As we approach the general election, hunting remains an unresolved political issue that still needs to be solved.

“The Hunting Act has failed at every level. There has been no attempt by any anti-hunting organisation to show improvement in the welfare of the quarry species since the Act came in.”

After 22 attempts to ban hunting with hounds through private members’ bills, Labour introduced the first government bill to abolish the sport in England and Wales in 2001, but it ran out of time due to the Iraq war. Despite two major protest marches, and numerous other pro-hunting demonstrations, Labour reintroduced its Hunting Bill in 2004.

It was only passed on 18 November after the Blair government controversially used the Parliament Act to overcome objections from the House of Lords. It was enforced three months later on 18 February 2005. Former Labour Prime Minister Tony Blair has since said he believed it was a mistake.

Scotland’s anti-hunting bill was passed in 2002, but the Northern Ireland Assembly firmly rejected an attempted bill to ban hunting in the province in 2010, and is currently the only UK area where traditional hunting with hounds is legal.

This news story was first published in Horse & Hound magazine (13 November 2014).

Stay in touch with all the news in the run-up to and throughout the major shows and events during 2026 and beyond with a Horse & Hound subscription. Subscribe today for all you need to know ahead of these major events, plus online reports on the action as it happens from our expert team of reporters and in-depth analysis in our special commemorative magazines. Have a subscription already? Set up your unlimited website access now

Three hunts have been facing legal proceedings in the past month, although two cases have been dropped and the other has been adjourned.

Tom Holt, joint-master of the Middleton Hunt, appeared before Scarborough Magistrates on 3 September, charged with an offence under the Hunting Act 2004.

The 28-year-old is accused of hunting a wild mammal with dogs in West Knapton, near Malton on 19 February.

Mr Holt pleaded not guilty and the case has been adjourned until 25 September.

Meanwhile, charges under the Protection of Badgers Act against three men connected to the York & Ainsty South Hunt were dropped on 8 September.

The case, brought by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), follows on from an allegation made by hunt saboteurs that the accused were interfering with an active badger sett during a meet at Escrick Park, near Selby, North Yorks on 28 December 2013.

“This case was based on completely spurious allegations made by animal rights activists, but there was no credible evidence that the sett was being used by anything other than foxes,” said the Countryside Alliance’s Tim Bonner.

“The three men were carrying out legal hunting within the terms of the Hunting Act.”

The CPS has also confirmed that all charges relating to members of the Melbreak Hunt — including their huntsman Edward Liddle — have also been dropped following an offence that allegedly took place under the Hunting Act and Dangerous Dog Act in Buttermere, Cumbria on 9 March.

Tim Bonner said: “Mr Liddle and the Melbreak cooperated fully with the police inquiries from the start and there was never any evidence that Mr Liddle had been in breach of either act, therefore we were surprised when Cumbria Constabulary chose to pursue their inquiries. It was even more inexplicable when the CPS then chose to bring charges against Mr Liddle.

“There was no chance that the case could ever have proceeded to a conviction and all it has achieved is a waste of police and court time and tax-payers’ money, and has put Mr Liddle through a completely unnecessary process.

“The Melbreak has operated within the law since the Hunting Act came into force and has huge support from the local community. We are very confident that their activities are entirely legitimate.”

This news story was first published in H&H magazine on 18 September 2014

Stay in touch with all the news in the run-up to and throughout the major shows and events during 2026 and beyond with a Horse & Hound subscription. Subscribe today for all you need to know ahead of these major events, plus online reports on the action as it happens from our expert team of reporters and in-depth analysis in our special commemorative magazines. Have a subscription already? Set up your unlimited website access now

The Countryside Alliance (CA) has warned that the Conservative Party risks jeopardising 500,000 votes if it fails to pledge to repeal the ban on fox hunting in its manifesto for the May 2015 general election. At the same time they have called for a cabinet post dedicated to rural affairs.

At the moment pro-hunting MPs are reluctant to put the issue to a vote, fearing they would not have enough support for victory without an overall Conservative majority and a party pledged to repeal.

The CA says there is a constituency of about half a million people whose support depended on a pledge to abolish the controversial Hunting Act. A poll of the association’s members last year found 13% were planning to vote for UKIP next year.

Sir Barney White-Spunner, chairman of the CA said: “We would like to see a commitment to repeal, tempered with a realistic view that we need some sort of legal framework in which hunting would operate in the future.”

Stay in touch with all the news in the run-up to and throughout the major shows and events during 2026 and beyond with a Horse & Hound subscription. Subscribe today for all you need to know ahead of these major events, plus online reports on the action as it happens from our expert team of reporters and in-depth analysis in our special commemorative magazines. Have a subscription already? Set up your unlimited website access now

The latest figures released by the Ministry of Justice show 110 people were charged and 56 found guilty of an offence under the Hunting Act 2004 during 2013 — but just 6 people allied to registered hunts have been convicted.

The figures — which exceed the previous high of 92 in 2009 — have been labelled misleading by countryside campaigners.

A Countryside Alliance spokesperson said that “these figures were further evidence that the Hunting Act is flawed, as so many of the cases brought under the Hunting Act do not actually involve hunts and could have been prosecuted under other legislation.”

This news-in-brief was first published in Horse & Hound magazine (17 July, 2014)

Stay in touch with all the news in the run-up to and throughout the major shows and events during 2026 and beyond with a Horse & Hound subscription. Subscribe today for all you need to know ahead of these major events, plus online reports on the action as it happens from our expert team of reporters and in-depth analysis in our special commemorative magazines. Have a subscription already? Set up your unlimited website access now

A prominent chief constable has denied that police will use “vigilantes” to enforce the hunting ban despite reports that hunt saboteurs are as active as they were before the ban.

Nigel Yeo, public order working group lead and assistant chief constable for Sussex Police, issued an internal pre-ban memo to all police forces in mid-January. He said: “[Anti-hunting] groups are committed to working with police to secure prosecutions relevant to anything they identify. Their hunt monitors may become witnesses. We should be mindful of their safety.”

But in a reply to a letter from a Wiltshire hunt supporter, Alastair McWhirter, spokesman for the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) on hunting with dogs, appears to contradict Yeo’s instructions.

In his more recent letter McWhirter said: “The Police Service recognises that there will be some… groups, who… will wish to disrupt legal hunting and inform police about any illegal activities. The Police Service actively discourages this and does not wish to use, or have any part, in such activities… we will not be using vigilantes.”

McWhirter added that there was “no national formula” about which anti-hunt organisations were considered legitimate to provide evidence.

Since the ban, saboteurs have been as active as ever. The Countryside Alliance estimates that the “level of hassle” is the same as before the ban.

Last weekend, five carloads of saboteurs followed the Essex Farmers and Union on hound exercise. A joint-master, who claims he was hit in the face, and a saboteur were arrested. The Surrey Union, South Dorset and Avon Vale were also scrutinised by video camera-wielding “monitors”.

Around 40 “monitors”, many in black balaclavas, followed the Chiddingfold, Leconfield and Cowdray the previous weekend. As a consequence, joint-master Nick Bamber wrote to his local chief constable to ask: “Should a number of saboteurs over, say, six, be allowed to ‘monitor’ when more than this is intimidating? When [they] walk over the scent line, is this disruptive — as hounds may cast off the line, with possible difficult results as far as the law is concerned?”

He added: “Saboteurs do not seem to accept or believe that we are acting within the law. A further concern is that saboteurs simply wish to see mock hunting erased from country activities.”

Saboteurs in the south have also been seen to spray citronella across a manmade trail, and to lay their own scent trail.

This news story was first published in Horse & Hound (17 March, ’05)

Stay in touch with all the news in the run-up to and throughout the major shows and events during 2026 and beyond with a Horse & Hound subscription. Subscribe today for all you need to know ahead of these major events, plus online reports on the action as it happens from our expert team of reporters and in-depth analysis in our special commemorative magazines. Have a subscription already? Set up your unlimited website access now

The Metropolitan Police have begun a fresh spate of arrests following the hunting demonstration in Parliament Square on 15 September last year, the day the Hunting Bill was passed.

Twenty-one hunt supporters were arrested that day. In the past month eight more have been arrested, and unconfirmed reports indicate that as many as 50 further arrests are being considered. All are being charged under section four of the Public Order Act — for example, for exhibiting aggressive behaviour or swearing at police.

Many of those recently arrested made formal complaints about police behaviour at the demo to the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC), prompting theories that evidence gathered by the IPCC on complainants may be helping to secure arrests.

“It is linked with the IPCC. The person complains, he’s interviewed, his face matched with a scene on the video and the police go back to charge him,” said barrister Richard Griffiths, who is defending two of the protestors arrested in the past month.

“I’ve heard the police have stills from videos and have put ‘do you know this man’ types of poster in police stations around the country — as they do for football hooligans.

“Whether it’s getting into a malicious prosecution action against the police I don’t know — but it’s being used to frighten field sports supporters. People are being charged with offences they clearly haven’t committed.

“It is serious that the police are being used in this way; it’s not about hunting any more,” added Griffiths, who is also concerned about the inconsistency of evidence being used by the police. He is appealing to other solicitors handling these cases to come forward so video evidence can be co-ordinated.

Mal Williams, huntsman and master of the South Herefordshire, complained to the IPCC five weeks before he received a letter asking him to go to his local police station to be arrested.

“Two senior police officers came up [from London] to meet me at Hereford police station,” said Williams. “I couldn’t work out why I was being arrested. Then it dawned on me; I made a complaint after my kennel huntsman, Steven Lenton, was bashed and had to have 24 stitches in his head. Four or five weeks later, I’m having my collar felt by the Met.”

The IPCC was set up last April specifically to handle complaints against the police independently. It received nearly 400 complaints over police behaviour at the Parliament Square demo and has conducted a huge number of face-to-face interviews with hunt supporters.

An IPCC spokesman explained that the organisation is required to pass on evidence that might defend the police reaction. In this case, aggressive behaviour towards the police would be a defence.

“If we turn up matter supporting the defence of the complainant or police officer involved, we must disclose it to the Crown Prosecution Service,” said the spokesman, who vehemently denied that the IPCC was helping the Met to identify protestors.

Read the full story in today’s Horse & Hound (10 March, 05)

Stay in touch with all the news in the run-up to and throughout the major shows and events during 2026 and beyond with a Horse & Hound subscription. Subscribe today for all you need to know ahead of these major events, plus online reports on the action as it happens from our expert team of reporters and in-depth analysis in our special commemorative magazines. Have a subscription already? Set up your unlimited website access now

More chaos has emerged as a result of the ban on hunting. Last weekend allegedly saw serious incidents of assault by anti-hunt campaigners, while Minister Ben Bradshaw says he has received a death threat from a pro-hunt campaigner, and is being targeted because he is gay.

The Countryside Alliance (CA) today released details of a violent incident near Marlborough at the weekend involving members of the Vine and Craven Hunt and a group of balaclava-clad anti-hunt protesters.

Followers of the Vine & Craven, which has killed no foxes since the ban came into force, were allegedly attacked by the saboteurs.

According to the CA, Hunt Master, Daemon Edwards, sustained several broken ribs when he and his horse were pulled to the ground, and Whipper-in, Duncan Cinnamond, was pulled from his horse and hit on the back of the head with a piece of timber.

Commenting on the attack, Delly Everard, Wessex Regional Director at the CA, said: “The thugs involved in this incident are people haters. They have shown total disregard for the law as well as animal and human welfare, while hunt supporters are obeying the law and are now hunting a trail.”

It has been claimed that pro-hunt campaigners have also been breaking the law. According to The Times newspaper, Animal Welfare Minister Ben Bradshaw, a vocal anti-hunt MP, has received a death threat from a pro-hunt activist.

A message warning Mr Bradshaw that his life was in danger was left on his office telephone answering machine, The Times reports this morning.

It follows an incident last month in Mr Bradshaw’s constituency, Exeter, when hunt protesters threw an “offal bomb” at his head causing a minor injury. Mr Bradshaw expressed concern not only for himself, but for his staff who accompany him on visits, saying they were mostly female civil servants who had become blameless targets for pro-hunt activists.

Everard said: “By passing discriminatory and divisive legislation, the Prime Minister and the Government have sent a clear message that it is acceptable to display prejudice towards the rural community. The ban on hunting has now caused even more problems for the countryside and the already overstretched police.”

Stay in touch with all the news in the run-up to and throughout the major shows and events during 2026 and beyond with a Horse & Hound subscription. Subscribe today for all you need to know ahead of these major events, plus online reports on the action as it happens from our expert team of reporters and in-depth analysis in our special commemorative magazines. Have a subscription already? Set up your unlimited website access now

Furious at the introduction of the hunting ban, hunt supporters in their thousands are joining a nationwide campaign to unseat those MPs who backed the legislation.

Already, 220 hunts have been mobilised in a three-month plan of attack to target 120 “hostile” MPs in marginal constituencies. Directing the energy from this minority into effective tactical activity in the run-up to the election are the dynamic Charles Mann and his wife, Chipps, both long-standing pro-hunt campaigners. The pair, together with seasoned lobbyist Jeremy Sweeney, have set up an office called Vote-OK.

Mann has recently left the Countryside Alliance (CA), where he ran the Action Office since 1997: the CA cannot become involved in pre-election activity because of legislation about electoral campaigning.

Simon Hart, CA chief executive, says: “We would encourage every supporter of freedom and tolerance to engage in the political process in this way. Alun Michael, rural affairs minister, Peter Hain, Leader of the Commons, and other anti-hunting MPs have challenged the rural community to make their views heard at the ballot box.

“Every individual must take responsibility for ensuring that the candidate who best represents their views and stands most chance of ousting an anti MP has as much support as possible at the general election.”

“We’ve almost got single-party, single-chamber democracy, which leads to what’s just happened with the Hunting Act,” says Charles Mann. “Minorities by definition can’t change governments. But what we can do is help to produce a stronger opposition, and if the CA can also demonstrate that the welfare of quarry species has deteriorated — which will take time — then, come the following election or the next opportunity to change the legislation, we’ll be in a stronger position. But to have an impact, we have to be focused. For the next three months, we must really concentrate on this.”

Vote-OK has identified around 120 marginal constituencies — a majority of around 12% or less — with an incumbent who has a proven track record of voting for a ban. Using the Manns’ nationwide contacts — gained through volunteer involvement in the first Countryside Rally and subsequent marches — Vote-OK has appointed a director for each constituency to work with a candidate sympathetic to hunting and target manpower where it’s needed.

Jeremy Sweeney says: “We are drawing manpower to where it’s needed: it’s about enabling people — whether they hunt or not — who feel that what’s happened is wrong, to make a difference, tactically and in a smart way.”

Volunteers from the hunting community are emphatically not asked to talk about hunting; in fact, they have not been asked to talk at all. Instead, they are doing legwork: dropping leaflets through letterboxes, putting up posters and providing fleets of cars and drivers to take voters — the old, carless or infirm — to polling stations. This frees up valuable time for core activists to do “personal” campaigning such as house-to-house canvassing.

Jeremy Sweeney adds: “The English are remarkably reluctant to get involved — it’s not our thing. But if they are involved, then we want to make damn sure they’re used intelligently.

“This election will be the first litmus test of the strength of feeling. If Charles Mann is asked afterwards how many people hunting got out on the ground to campaign and he says 50, then that’s it. But if we had 15,000, that is quite extraordinary. To get British people out on any kind of scale is quite a thing — and the media and politicians know this.

“If people have the experience of being used effectively, where we can point to results and say: ‘You made a difference’; then, at the next election, they’ll come out again. People realise they can make a difference, and I wouldn’t underestimate that.”

For more details on Vote-OK’s plans to campaign against anti-hunt MPs, see today’s issue of Horse & Hound (3 March, ’05)

Stay in touch with all the news in the run-up to and throughout the major shows and events during 2026 and beyond with a Horse & Hound subscription. Subscribe today for all you need to know ahead of these major events, plus online reports on the action as it happens from our expert team of reporters and in-depth analysis in our special commemorative magazines. Have a subscription already? Set up your unlimited website access now

A petition has been lodged with the House of Lords by the Countryside Alliance (CA) requesting that the House hears an appeal to the original High Court judgement on the 1949 Parliament Act.

Although judges at the Court of Appeal rejected the CA’s case, they crucially acknowledged the constitutional significance of the challenge, and supported their argument that the 1949 Act was subordinate legislation.

John Jackson, CA Chairman oand one of the applicants in the case, said: “This application is a matter of major constitutional importance. A fact that is acknowledged by the Attorney General, who supported our original application for appeal, and considers that this case should be heard by the Lords.”

The Alliance has often acknowledged that their case stands the best chance of being heard by the Lords, so is still feeling confident their case is a strong one. However, hunt supporters may have to sit tight for some time: when a petition is lodged it can take months to be heard, with some having to wait as long as a year.

Stay in touch with all the news in the run-up to and throughout the major shows and events during 2026 and beyond with a Horse & Hound subscription. Subscribe today for all you need to know ahead of these major events, plus online reports on the action as it happens from our expert team of reporters and in-depth analysis in our special commemorative magazines. Have a subscription already? Set up your unlimited website access now

People arrested for hunting after the ban comes into force should not follow Countryside Alliance advice to refuse the services of the duty solicitor, a pro-hunting lawyer has urged.

Sarah Barnard, criminal partner at a Hampshire-based firm, who has worked as a duty solicitor for 15 years, warns that using a solicitor unfamiliar with police station work may not be in suspects’ best interests.

“The police station interview is crucial: information from it goes to the Crown prosecutor, who decides whether to prosecute or to drop the case. Get the interview wrong and you’re in deep trouble,” warns Barnard, who is not on the CA’s list of recommended solicitors.

She adds that those who practice criminal law “day in, day out” are more familiar with police station work, than experts on the Hunting Act who do not.

The CA has set up a 24-hr helpline so that anyone arrested can reach a local solicitor who is an expert on the Hunting Act and will work for free at police station stage. But, though all of the 60-plus lawyers on the list are qualified and registered to do police station work, the CA admits that not all do so regularly.

“All are well-versed in criminal law and qualified to do police station work, and are experts on the Hunting Act. But they won’t be the same solicitors the police offer, who could know nothing about the Act,” the CA spokesman adds.

Criminal lawyer Clive Rees, who is on the CA’s ever-expanding list, adds: “The most important thing is that under no circumstances should anyone try to respond to police questioning without an experienced solicitor present.

“Solicitors will give the suspect full details of the prosecution case so he or she is not taken by surprise in the interview. Plus, if there’s insufficient evidence for a prosecution, the solicitor will advise a ‘no comment’ interview.”

Both duty solicitors and those on the CA’s list provide their services free until a detainee is charged — after this stage, clients must pay or apply for legal aid.

If you are arrested:

• Co-operate with police, even if they’re being rude or provocative. Be polite, or they may find something else to arrest you for, such as a public order offence for swearing at a police officer
• Don’t answer questions about the offence until a solicitor is present. Don’t talk to custody staff about the offence — they’re obliged to tell the investigating officer
• Get a solicitor, one used to working in police stations, or phone the CA 24hr legal helpline (tel: 08719 193505).
• Always go back for your police station appointments, and keep in touch with your solicitor
• Apply for legal aid — it is not means-tested
• Conditions may be set for bail to prevent further offending, such as not going for a ride with more than one other person or not riding at all. But you could say that you need to ride your horse for its health

This news article was first published in Horse & Hound (17 February, ’05)

Stay in touch with all the news in the run-up to and throughout the major shows and events during 2026 and beyond with a Horse & Hound subscription. Subscribe today for all you need to know ahead of these major events, plus online reports on the action as it happens from our expert team of reporters and in-depth analysis in our special commemorative magazines. Have a subscription already? Set up your unlimited website access now

Simon Hart, chief executive, Countryside Alliance

“At the moment, it looks like I’ll be out with the Beaufort at Badminton — probably on my feet, I hasten to add. It’s a work day; there’ll be a lot of media there and I’ll have a lot to do.”

Brian Fanshawe, secretary, Council of Hunting Associations

“I shall probably go to the Beaufort because it’s just up the road. I’ll be on foot as I haven’t been on a horse for 10 years.”

Alastair Jackson, director, Masters of Foxhounds Association

“I’ll go to our local meet, which is the Heythrop. I’ll be on foot as I haven’t ridden since I hunted hounds back in 1989.”

William Fox-Pitt, H&H eventing columnist

“We’re going out with the Blackmore and Sparkford Vale. My wife, Alice, is at Wincanton but is going to try to make it — we’ll both be riding.”

Marcus Armytage, H&H racing columnist

“I’ll be going out — mounted — with the Old Berks, where I used to be a master. I will be writing a report for H&H.”

James Gray MP, shadow countryside minister

“Members of Parliament must not break the law, but most hunts, including the Avon Vale, of which I’m a member, are saying that they won’t break the law, so I’ll be going along on foot to our meet. I won’t be mounted because I’ve only been out a few times this season so I’m not fit enough to ride. My son will be mounted, though. But I will be there and I will speak to the crowd if I can.”

Stuart Hollings, H&H showing columnist

“I’ll be going out on foot — I don’t do much riding these days — with what on Wednesday will still be the Vale of Lune Harriers, but on the 19th will be the Three Counties Bloodhounds by invitation of the Vale of Lune Harriers. They pre-empted the ban and bought some Bloodhounds a while ago. They’re called the Three Counties because they hunt in Lancashire, Yorkshire and Cumbria.”

Michael Clayton, H&H columnist and former Editor

“I’ve been helping to organise the huge demonstration through Melton Mowbray, so I shall be there — on my feet.”

Graham Fletcher, H&H show jumping columnist

“I’m sure we’ll be going out on Saturday — our local pack is the Old Berks. If I have a horse I think will be huntable I’ll take that.”

Michael Markham, co-founder of the Hunting Declaration

“I’ll be out with the Warwickshire but will not be on a horse because I’ll be videoing the day and it’s difficult to do so on horseback. Both Roger Scruton and I feel that the 44,000 signatures [gained on the hunting declaration] have huge political importance and I hope that the leadership of the hunting community is still considering the enormous potential of deploying this movement.”

Lucy Higginson, Editor, Horse & Hound

“I’ll be following the Old Berkshire hunt, mounted. It’s meeting at its kennels, near Faringdon. And I very much hope that besides getting a huge turnout, we’re able to have some sort of fun afterwards, in a way that provides some stimulation for followers on horses, in cars and for the hounds.

“Additionally, I’m pleased to report that our racing editor will be following the Ledbury or North Ledbury on foot; our news editors will be riding out with the Surrey Union; our hunting editor will be out on foot with a Kent pack, our show jumping editor will be on foot with an Essex pack; our deputy picture editor will be mounted with the Thurlow and one of our editorial assistants will be out with the Oakley on foot.”

View details of your local meet >>

This news feature was first published in Horse 7 Hound (17 February, ’05)

Stay in touch with all the news in the run-up to and throughout the major shows and events during 2026 and beyond with a Horse & Hound subscription. Subscribe today for all you need to know ahead of these major events, plus online reports on the action as it happens from our expert team of reporters and in-depth analysis in our special commemorative magazines. Have a subscription already? Set up your unlimited website access now

At midnight tonight (17 February) the Hunting Act 2004 comes into force. While most hunts are meeting for a “last day” of real hunting today, they are also gearing up for a mass show of strength on Saturday, when hundreds of thousands of supporters are expected to turn out at meets across the country for the first day of hunting under Labour’s ban.

Virtually every Foxhound, Harrier, staghound, Beagle and Basset pack in England and Wales has arranged to meet, many in prominent or historic venues. Hound exercise, trailhunting and exempt hunting will follow — and run-ins with saboteurs seem likely.

The equestrian world is rallying in support: one Suffolk hunt is meeting at Tattersalls in Newmarket; several are meeting at eventing venues, such as Firle in East Sussex, while others have chosen to parade through towns.

Supporters will set out on Saturday to prove that people turning out in hunting gear with hounds doesn’t equal law-breaking.

View details on hunt meets taking place on Saturday 19 February >>

View hunts’ plans to continue after the ban comes into force >>

This news story was first published in Horse & Hound (17 February, ’05)

Stay in touch with all the news in the run-up to and throughout the major shows and events during 2026 and beyond with a Horse & Hound subscription. Subscribe today for all you need to know ahead of these major events, plus online reports on the action as it happens from our expert team of reporters and in-depth analysis in our special commemorative magazines. Have a subscription already? Set up your unlimited website access now

The Court of Appeal upheld the Parliament Act as an act of law this morning, effectively putting an end to the Countryside Alliance’s efforts so far to prove that the law was invalid.

This means that a ban on hunting with dogs will come into effect on 18 February, as voted for by MPs in November last year.

There is still the possibility that hunt supporters could take their case to the House of Lords, but they cannot ask for an injunction until their case has made its way there.

The ban will go ahead, and pro-hunters’ plans to continue hunting, whether legally or illegally, are set to swing into action this weekend as meets take place all over the country in defiance of what many see as an unjust law.

View details of hunts’ meets on 19 February >>

John Jackson from the Countryside Alliance said this morning said that he was encouraged by the ruling and they are to petition the House of Lords to hear their case. He also added that although the Attorney General asked for fees to be paid, the Court ruled against this request.

Chief executive of the Countryside Alliance, Simon Hart, told Horse & Hound Online: “I can think of better results but it’s not all bad. The Judge said that further debate was required, and it will be had. The Judge also refused to do the Attorney General’s dirty work in terms of interim relief, and said that he would have to make up his own mind whether to prosecute people who are accused of illegal hunting.”

The appeal using the Human Rights Act is due to get underway in April, and a petition for the appeal against the Parliament Act is due to be lodged with the House of Lords as soon as possible, added Mr Hart.

Meanwhile a new poll conducted by MORI for the BBC’s Countryfile shows that the majority of rural people oppose a ban on hunting. The poll of 2,234 people UK-wide shows that even in urban areas there is no majority support for a ban.

Stay in touch with all the news in the run-up to and throughout the major shows and events during 2026 and beyond with a Horse & Hound subscription. Subscribe today for all you need to know ahead of these major events, plus online reports on the action as it happens from our expert team of reporters and in-depth analysis in our special commemorative magazines. Have a subscription already? Set up your unlimited website access now

Documents leaked to Sunday’s Observer newspaper have further revealed the extent of police confusion surrouding how to enforce a ban on hunting, as well as emphasising that dealing with hunts is to be a low priority for police officers.

Home Office Minister Charles Clarke confirmed this suspicion yesterday in a television interview saying that he did not “expect foxhunting to be very high on the priorities of any police force”.

However, other concerns voiced in documents seen by the Observer include the belief that forces could ultimately be weakened by the fact that some officers are members of their local hunts, which would undermine their “policing style”, and that tension could lead to serious civil unrest.

Potentially violent hunts are to be categorised in the same way as football matches by the Avon and Somerset police, it was claimed, with provision for riot police to be called in. This indicates that although police are not choosing to necessarily arrest people breaking the hunting act, some officers are preparing for some serious clashes between animal rights activists and people either hunting, or exercising hounds.

“…the ban’s impact may cause greater public disorder, which will have a much higher priority than hunting offences per se,” the police memo was quoted as saying.

The Countryside Alliance has said it believes the unworkable nature of this Act will become clear if it comes into force on Thursday, as a result of the CA’s High Court Appeal being thrown out.

“From today’s reports it is quite clear that the police, at both the local and national level, are seriously concerned about the implications of implementing the Hunting Act on their relationships with local communities,” said Simon Hart today. “The Act threatens to destroy the trust and mutual respect which allows small numbers of policemen to police huge areas of rural Britain. Without co-operation rural policing cannot work.

“The definitions of legal and illegal hunting are so blurred that the police are being asked to make impossible judgements. You can hunt a rat, but not a mouse; a rabbit, but not a hare; an artificial scent, but not a real one,” he added.

One site where clashes have already begun is at what is set to be the final Waterloo Cup, the largest hare coursing event in the country, which is taking place today, Tuesday and Wednesday at Altcar in Merseyside. At 2pm today the BBC was already reporting that a number of coursing enthusiasts had been arrested as pro-hunt people clashed with police officers, and anti-hunt protestors.

For details of hunts’ plans after a ban click here.

Stay in touch with all the news in the run-up to and throughout the major shows and events during 2026 and beyond with a Horse & Hound subscription. Subscribe today for all you need to know ahead of these major events, plus online reports on the action as it happens from our expert team of reporters and in-depth analysis in our special commemorative magazines. Have a subscription already? Set up your unlimited website access now

The Middle Way Group (MWG) has made a renewed call for the government and animal welfare groups to re-consider the animal welfare implications of a ban on hunting with dogs, and to consider the wording of the Hunting Act itself.

With the date for a ban fast approaching, the MWG said that their original academic study into shooting foxes has now been peer reviewed, and is to be published in the Journal of Animal Welfare in May. The study found that shooting animals can cause more suffering than hunting, if people do not stick to the shooting code of practice.

Jim Barrington of the MWG says: “The study examines the wounding rates in varied shooting regimes. It does show that when codes of practice are followed, wounding is kept to a minimum, but it also shows that when such standards are ignored high levels of wounding do occur.”

However, the British Assoication of Shooting and Conservation refutes these findings, arguing that its own study found that shooting resulted in clean kill rates of around 90%, but it does remain to be seen whether all new shooters will stick to the code. It also remains to be seen whether their study is to be peer reviewed.

The MWG also argued today that the Hunting Act, crucially, does not just affect traditional hunting communities, but every dog owner in England and Wales. The amount of clarity within the legislation itself is something which remains to be seen, argues the MWG, but their members claim there is bound to be confusion amongst police, dog owners, and ex-hunters alike.

Lembit Öpik from the MWG has been in correspondence with Alun Michael in an attempt to clear up some questions as to what will and will not be allowed under the new Act, for instance where does the law stand on three or more dogs hunting a drag, and catching a fox by accident?

For a full list of what the MWG considers to be questionable situations, click here.

However, Mr Michael remains adamant that the Hunting Act is a well-formed piece of legislation, and told Mr Opik he was confident the courts would not tolerate people who, having been charged with illegal hunting, sought to get off on technicalities.

Meanwhile the Countryside Alliance is awaiting the outcome of a ruling from the Court of Appeal on their challenge to the validity of the Parliament Act. The ban on hunting with dogs is due to come into force on 18 February.

Stay in touch with all the news in the run-up to and throughout the major shows and events during 2026 and beyond with a Horse & Hound subscription. Subscribe today for all you need to know ahead of these major events, plus online reports on the action as it happens from our expert team of reporters and in-depth analysis in our special commemorative magazines. Have a subscription already? Set up your unlimited website access now

The Ministry of Defence has formally notified hunts that if they want a licence to cross its land after 18 February they must become members of the Masters of Bloodhounds and Draghounds Association (MDBA). Hunts received the news by letter last weekend.

While the revoking of current agreements does not come as a surprise given the new legislation, some fear that the ministry will not be open to negotiating new agreements to allow mock or trail hunting, or indeed exempt hunting, within the law. The MP in charge of MoD estates is Ivor Caplin, an honorary life member of the League Against Cruel Sports.

However, a spokesman for the MoD has told Horse & Hound that hunts may still apply for permission from local defence estates offices, in the same way that organisers of cross-country runs, paragliding and four-wheel drive rallies do before an event. Permission would, though, not always be given. If granted, it could be on a day-by-day or seasonal basis, depending on local circumstances.

The MoD has to date had a “master agreement” with the Masters of Foxhounds Association (MFHA), but packs still had to apply for individual licences.

Alastair Jackson, director of the MFHA, says: “I will suggest to the MoD that it might negotiate a new master agreement with us for legal activities. I’m confident we’ll be able to make new agreements with the Forestry Commission and National Trust and I hope we’ll be able to do so with the MoD too.”

However, a spokesman for the MoD says: “Hunts and other groups can ask permission for activities on a local basis to carry out legal forms of hunting — but we don’t plan to make a new agreement with the MFHA.”

The Royal Artillery hunt, most of whose country on Salisbury Plain is administered by the MoD, has already had talks with the Masters of Draghounds and Bloodhounds Association about converting fully to draghunting so that it can continue.

Four Welsh Foxhound packs — the Sennybridge Farmers, the Brecon and Talybont, the Irfon and Towy and the South Pembrokeshire — three of which are featured next week in Horse & Hound — use extensive tracts of MoD land.

A joint-master of another hunt that uses some MoD land says: “If hunts are changing their constitutions and activities to operate within the law, why can’t the MoD alter parts of its existing arrangement to comply with the law?”

Read the full story in today’s Horse & Hound (27 January ’05).

Stay in touch with all the news in the run-up to and throughout the major shows and events during 2026 and beyond with a Horse & Hound subscription. Subscribe today for all you need to know ahead of these major events, plus online reports on the action as it happens from our expert team of reporters and in-depth analysis in our special commemorative magazines. Have a subscription already? Set up your unlimited website access now

Sir Sydney Kentridge QC will this morning lead the challenge to the Parliament Act being brought under the names of three petitioners: John Jackson, chairman of the Countryside Alliance; Mair Hughes, a blacksmith’s wife from Glamorgan and Patrick Martin; huntsman of the Bicester with Whaddon Chase Hunt.

The aim of the challenge is to prove that the 1949 Parliament Act is unlawful because it was passed without the consent of the House of Lords. Sir Sydney Kentridge is going to argue that because of this, the true Parliament Act is the previous one passed in 1911, which ruled that the House of Lords must reject legislation three times before a law can be forced onto the statue book without its consent.

The Hunting Act came before the Lords only twice in the last session, according to the rules of the 1949 Act.

John Jackson said this morning: “This case has little to do with hunting and much to do with the constitutional arrangements in our country and respect for the law. We are asking the High Court to rule that the Parliament Act of 1949 which was used to impose the Hunting Act, is invalid and cannot be used to impose anything.”

In reply to questioners accusing him of undermining the supremacy of the elected house – the House of Commons – over the unelected members of the House of Lords, Mr Jackson replied: “We are not disrupting the supremacy of Parliament. Parliament is the House of Commons, the House of Lords, and the Sovereign acting together and together, as Parliament, they have the ultimate right to make the law. But Parliament, and its constituent parts, must itself abide by the law which it has made. That is what the Rule of Law means.”

The hearing is due to last two days, with Mr Kentridge going up against the Attorney General himself who will defend the Act, in an unusual appearance by the chief legal adviser to the government. A ruling is due on Friday with room for an appeal from the CA, should the decision go against them.

Mr Jackson also said there was, as yet, no decision to be made on whether the Alliance would be applying for an injunction on the ban to delay its enforcement while the court case continues: “There is no need for us to consider that at present,” he said. “We are concentrating on our case today, we believe it is a strong one, and we believe we will win.”

The League Against Cruel Sports has also said it will be present in court today to argue against any appeal for an injunction the CA might make, arguing that they were “seeking to uphold parliamentary democracy by opposing any delay to the commencement of the ban lasting beyond February 18, the date agreed by Parliament.”

Stay in touch with all the news in the run-up to and throughout the major shows and events during 2026 and beyond with a Horse & Hound subscription. Subscribe today for all you need to know ahead of these major events, plus online reports on the action as it happens from our expert team of reporters and in-depth analysis in our special commemorative magazines. Have a subscription already? Set up your unlimited website access now

Alun Michael’s request to meet John Jackson of the Countryside Alliance to discuss the “practical issues” of what to do with horses and hounds in the event of the hunting ban coming into force, has been turned down.

In a letter to Mr Jackson last week, Rural Affairs Minister Alun Michael expressed concern over the fate of horses and hounds associated with hunts once the ban comes in to force on 18 February. He requested a meeting with alliance representatives and other interested parties in order to discuss “the practical issues”.

In his reply, Mr Jackson defended hunts, stating that they would continue to regularly exercise their dogs and horses while the CA attempts to overturn the ban in the courts: “I believe that hunts and others intend to keep their positions intact by regularly exercising their dogs and, if relevant, their horses. That being the case it seems that no redundancy of dogs and horses arising from the situation you have created is in prospect.”

He went on to say that any consultation, especially under the government’s sponsorship, would be an “unwarranted interference in matters [hunts] understand very well.”

A spokeswoman for DEFRA told Horse & Hound Online that the government intends to press ahead with consultations on the issue of animal welfare with various other organisations.

“The government wants to minimise the animal welfare implications and will work with organisations that are willing to participate to make sure the transition is as smooth as possible. It will be a huge disappointment if the Countryside Alliance does not engage in the work,” she said.

Stay in touch with all the news in the run-up to and throughout the major shows and events during 2026 and beyond with a Horse & Hound subscription. Subscribe today for all you need to know ahead of these major events, plus online reports on the action as it happens from our expert team of reporters and in-depth analysis in our special commemorative magazines. Have a subscription already? Set up your unlimited website access now

A senior police official has applied to the Master of Foxhounds Association (MFA) for information as to how to identify an illegal hunt once the ban comes into force on 18 February, indicating the level of confusion surrounding this issue.

In a letter to Alastair Jackson, Director of the MFA, Assistant Chief Constable Nigel Yeo, police adviser on how to implement the act, sought advice and admitted that officers with responsibility for policing the ban will find it difficult to distinguish between illegal hunting with hounds and legal drag hunts.

“I would greatly welcome your assistance in any guidance I can give to police officers on how to identify the difference between [drag hunting and trial hunts] and fox hunting,” Mr Yeo asked.

In reply, Mr Jackson explained that while the MFHA will advise hunts on how they can continue to operate within the law until the ban is repealed, even experienced observers of hunting would have difficulties. “I would consider it almost impossible for anyone to know if a pack of hounds was hunting a fox or a drag. I do not envy you your job,” he said.

Darren Hughes, spokesman for the Countryside Alliance, said: “We have consistently warned the government that the Hunting Act is bad legislation and that it would be practically un-enforceable. It is preposterous that the government are forcing already overstretched police forces to waste extremely valuable resources implementing this ridiculous law.”

Stay in touch with all the news in the run-up to and throughout the major shows and events during 2026 and beyond with a Horse & Hound subscription. Subscribe today for all you need to know ahead of these major events, plus online reports on the action as it happens from our expert team of reporters and in-depth analysis in our special commemorative magazines. Have a subscription already? Set up your unlimited website access now

A new advisory handbook on hunting post-18 February hopes to answer the most common questions among hunt followers when it is released next Monday, to coincide with the Boxing Day meets at which record-breaking attendances are anticipated.

The 45-page Hunting Handbook, produced by the Countryside Alliance (CA) for the Council of Hunting Associations (CHA), addresses issues ranging from what to do if you’re arrested to how to continue legal activities with different types of hound. It will be distributed to all hunts and a further 10,000 copies are available.

While the guide — entitled Hunting Handbook 2005: What you need to know about hunting within the law — offers little in the way of quick-fix solutions, it does bring together, in precise and legally verified detail, all the strands from discussions to date.

It says that hunts should:

• change constitutions, but not their names
• hold meets on 19 February at high-profile locations; thereafter, hunt on same days as other packs under same police authority
• avoid other charges — for instance, trespass and lack of horse passports
• notify the CHA of police approaches and enquiries
• consider “sponsor a hound” schemes for supporters
• keep the CHA informed about trail hunting tests
• continue their fallen stock collection services
• provide wildlife management service and callout to farmers using two hounds and a gun
• maintain a close relationship with local Pony Club branches

If arrested it advises that you:

• do not accept a caution from the police — it amounts to an admission of guilt
• get hold of a lawyer who is fully briefed on the Hunting Act — a regional register will soon be available
• if arrested in charge of horses or hounds, insist police know how they should be treated, housed and fed

It also explains that legal activities can be based on:

• hunting simulated scent
• hound exercise, including cross-country rides
• exemptions, including flushing with two dogs, rabbit hunting and ratting, flushing to birds of prey to enable them to hunt the wild mammal — although “given the skills and experience required for falconry, this should not be considered lightly”

Read the full story on the new Hunting Handbook in today’s issue of Horse & Hound (23 December, ’04)

Stay in touch with all the news in the run-up to and throughout the major shows and events during 2026 and beyond with a Horse & Hound subscription. Subscribe today for all you need to know ahead of these major events, plus online reports on the action as it happens from our expert team of reporters and in-depth analysis in our special commemorative magazines. Have a subscription already? Set up your unlimited website access now

A popular Exmoor beauty spot has been closed off to walkers by its owner in protest at the hunting ban.

The area is known as “Snowdrop Valley” to locals, thanks to the flower which thrives in the area every spring. It draws thousands of visitors every year, and it is thought the move will have a damaging effect on the local economy.

The landowner, the Badgworthy Land Company, has strong hunting connections. The company’s chairman, Tom Yandle, also chairs the Devon and Somerset staghounds, and is an outspoken pro-hunt activist.

In a letter to the Exmoor National Park Authority the company’s directors expressed their regret at any harm that will be done to the local economy. However, they said, there was no choice but to adopt this course of action in protest at the hunting legislation.

The incident is the latest act of passive non-cooperation by pro-hunt protesters, whereby legal protests are made through acts of non-cooperation with official bodies. Such action has been encouraged by the Countryside Alliance in the wake of the Hunting Bill’s turbulent passage through parliament last month.

A spokeswoman from the Alliance said: “The government has caused huge anger in the countryside through their dishonest behaviour on the hunting issue. They cannot expect the countryside not to react.”

Stay in touch with all the news in the run-up to and throughout the major shows and events during 2026 and beyond with a Horse & Hound subscription. Subscribe today for all you need to know ahead of these major events, plus online reports on the action as it happens from our expert team of reporters and in-depth analysis in our special commemorative magazines. Have a subscription already? Set up your unlimited website access now

The golden principle of the law of England and Wales is that a jury must be satisfied — beyond reasonable doubt — that an offence has been committed and that the perpetrator is the person in the dock.

How in the case of the Hunting Act could such evidence be gathered, much less presented? An RSPCA or LACS video of hounds apparently pursuing a fox may be damning evidence, you might think, but what if the drag line laid earlier in the day has also gone that way?

The point is that the defence has — subject to one or two restrictions — to prove nothing. The Crown must prove its case — to the hilt. In the recent case surrounding Scottish huntsman Trevor Adams, the Crown failed to do that.

With beagling, how does the Crown intend to prove that the So-and-So Beagles under the control of their huntsman hunted a hare, and disprove the huntsman’s belief that he was hunting a rabbit? It is clear from the way the Act is drafted that its intention is not to catch draghunters, hunters of clean boot and hunters of rabbits and rats.

So if someone — a huntsman, for example — is arrested after 18 February and charged with hunting a mammal, what would happen?

The defendant would be expected to explain himself, during a police interview or the witness box, or both. Beyond calling on some evidence in support of what he was doing, he has nothing to prove. In many cases, the defence lawyer will be able to make a submission of “no case to answer”, so that his client never reaches the witness box.

And what about hunt followers? Where would they stand legally? The vast majority of us who “ride to hounds” neither cause nor permit anything at all, let alone the hunting of a mammal by dogs. It seems therefore that anyone watching a foxhunt from horseback, provided they are not assisting, is immune from prosecution.

What of the masters, who would, in effect, have organised the hunting day? Conceivably, they might be prosecuted for conspiracy to hunt, but at that point the very simple principle of the Act is going to be lost in the legal minefield of what is involved in the law of conspiracy. As long as the masters and hunt committee take no part in actual hunting, they too are probably safe from prosecution.

Anyone who thinks hounds can quickly be stopped from chasing foxes — having been bred for the purpose for centuries — is deluding themselves. The antis say that hounds can convert to draghunting. Fine; let’s give it a try. Provided we have put in hand a system of training that is strictly adhered to throughout the next autumn hunting season, we cannot be criticised for this. The court may ask for records of that training; we must provide them. It may ask for examples of training methods; let them see such examples.

Provided we are seen genuinely to attempt to abide by the law during this Act, while preserving in our hounds their ability to hunt their appropriate quarry, we should have nothing to fear.

If every pack in the country resolves to keep going but to do what is permitted under this legislation, this Act will become a laughing stock. On the other hand, if we openly defy the Act and become martyrs, we need not be surprised if our horses, hounds and vehicles are seized.

This news feature was first published in Horse & Hound (16 December, ’04)

Stay in touch with all the news in the run-up to and throughout the major shows and events during 2026 and beyond with a Horse & Hound subscription. Subscribe today for all you need to know ahead of these major events, plus online reports on the action as it happens from our expert team of reporters and in-depth analysis in our special commemorative magazines. Have a subscription already? Set up your unlimited website access now

The Countryside Alliance has insisted that it is providing strong leadership and doing its utmost to overturn the hunting ban, in response to a leaked letter demanding “clearer leadership”.

The Sunday Telegraph published extracts of the letter, from Tory peer and Old Berkshire hunt chairman Viscount Astor to alliance chairman John Jackson, last week. It also urged the CA to explain what civil disobedience entails.

“The letter was not intended to be divisive,” Viscount Astor told Horse & Hound. “It was more that the CA was not being as clear in its message as it might be.

“Civil disobedience can be entirely legal. My letter said the alliance should articulate this so that people understand what civil disobedience means. A lot of people want to do things but don’t know what to do.”

John Jackson was not available for comment, having gone abroad for a month, but alliance spokesman Tim Bonner says: “The alliance is not backing down — and we will be active in testing and ridiculing this legislation. I hope people feel they’re getting enough guidance. We can’t be accused of not having warned people that this was coming.”

Despite widespread media coverage of a planned “mass day of rebellion” on 19 February, there is a growing sense that the exact nature of the legal “hunting activity” planned needs to be established soon.

With this in mind, the Council of Hunting Associations and Countryside Alliance have collaborated on a 50-page Hunting Handbook, which is being produced and distributed by the CA.

“It encompasses everything from draft landowner agreements to an analysis of everything hunts can and can’t do under the legislation,” says CA chief executive Simon Hart.

The handbook will be distributed to hunts shortly and will also be available soon on the CA website.

This news story was first published in Horse & Hound (16 December, ’04)

Stay in touch with all the news in the run-up to and throughout the major shows and events during 2026 and beyond with a Horse & Hound subscription. Subscribe today for all you need to know ahead of these major events, plus online reports on the action as it happens from our expert team of reporters and in-depth analysis in our special commemorative magazines. Have a subscription already? Set up your unlimited website access now

Farmers across England and Wales have pledged support to enable the sport, in its “mock” form, to continue from 18 February.

Initial fears that subsidies could be cut if farmers inadvertently allow an illegal activity on their land are “misplaced”, according to one expert. Hunts anticipate that written agreements with landowners confirming intention to stay within the law will eliminate the risk of landowners’ prosecutions.

The most frequent inquiry to the Country Land and Business Association (CLA) has been about the Single Farm Payment (SFP) being jeopardised.

The CLA’s lawyer, Christopher Price, says: “This concern is entirely misplaced. There’s no danger of losing the SFP over hunting. Farmers get it if they meet cross-compliance conditions set by the EU and DEFRA. They include agricultural and environmental rules on matters such as soil, protection and setaside.

“The offence for landowners under the Act is if a landowner ‘knowingly permits’ hunting. Whether this will be interpreted as ‘expressly authorises’ or ‘fails to take steps to prevent’, we don’t know.”

Farmers Horse & Hound contacted were keen to welcome the hunt — as long as it continued fallen stock and some pest control services.

Peter Davidson-Smith, who farms in Gloucestershire, says: “We have the North Cotswold and the Heythrop here. They are under a strict leadership and obey the rules of the countryside. They cause minimal damage and provide me with two services — taking fallen stock and controlling foxes.

“If an organised group still provides this, I’ll allow them across. If the services disappear, I’ll have concerns. I don’t hunt, but it’s a part of the countryside we lose at our peril.”

Jim Webster, a non-hunting cattle and sheep farmer in Cumbria, says: “If somebody wants to exercise dogs or horses across our land, no problem. In winter, we’re busy feeding stock inside. I won’t go to parts of the farm for months. Having the hunt helps keep an eye on it — responsible people who know the countryside will tell me if a fence is iffy or a dyke is blocked.”

This news story was published in full in Horse & Hound (9 December, 04)

Stay in touch with all the news in the run-up to and throughout the major shows and events during 2026 and beyond with a Horse & Hound subscription. Subscribe today for all you need to know ahead of these major events, plus online reports on the action as it happens from our expert team of reporters and in-depth analysis in our special commemorative magazines. Have a subscription already? Set up your unlimited website access now

The Hunting Act 2004 is a very simple Act of Parliament. Its simplicity is its strength, which is bad news for the hunting community, because it is harder to circumvent. But there are occasional grey areas.

What constitutes a criminal offence?

The first section of the Act makes it absolutely clear what constitutes a criminal offence. There’s no mention of cruelty. It says: “A person commits an offence if he hunts a wild animal with a dog, unless his hunting is exempt.”

“Hunting” is not defined, which may be a problem for police. If a pet dog is loose in a park and races after a squirrel, the dog is hunting but the owner might not be. If the owner encourages the dog to hunt, telling it what to do, then the owner is also “hunting”.

What if the owner, knowing his dog will hunt, lets it off the lead but sits quietly on a park bench while it decimates the squirrel population? There’s no answer in this Act and the courts will have to fill in the grey areas.

Of more practical importance is the hunting of “drag” — not draghunting, but using hounds to follow the overnight trail of the fox, deer or other wild animal to its den. Can this be seen as “hunting” given that the hunted animal is often unaware of hounds following it and takes no evasive action of any kind?

This kind of hunting was important years ago in foxhunting and remains vital today in the sport of mink hunting.

What kind of hunting is exempt?

The Act sets out the forms of hunting that remain legal. They are:

Stalking a wild animal or flushing it out of cover, as long as the stalking or flushing is done to prevent or reduce damage by the (quarry) animal to livestock, game and wild birds, food for livestock, crops, growing timber, fisheries or the biological diversity of an area, or to obtain meat for human and/or animal consumption, or to take part in a field trial.

This stalking and flushing has to take place on land belonging to the person carrying it out, or by the landowner’s permission. It cannot involve more than two dogs. There is some argument whether this means two dogs per person or two dogs overall; personally I think it means only two dogs in total. Once the animal has been stalked or flushed it must be shot as soon as reasonably possible.

Dogs can be used below ground (to flush out foxes) for stalking and shooting to protect wild or game birds or to help prevent or reduce serious damage to game or wild birds. There is no exemption for terrier work to protect your own livestock.

The person doing the stalking and flushing must have with him written evidence to show the land belongs to him or that he has the permission of the landowner. Only one dog can be put to ground at any time. There are further rules about the dog’s welfare, and the quarry must be shot as soon as is reasonably possible.

Rats, rabbits, hares and birds: when it comes to hunting with dogs, some mammals are given greater “rights” than others. Rat hunting is exempt so long as it takes place on your own land or with the landowner’s permission. Ditto for rabbit hunting. As for hares, you are allowed to retrieve them if they have already been shot. You can continue to hunt any quarry species if you plan to use a falcon.

Escaped animals: you’re allowed to hunt an animal that has escaped, as long as it was not released for the purpose of hunting. It must be shot immediately. There are exemptions for hunting an injured animal, but with no more than two dogs. No terrier work is permitted. There are exemptions for research and observation using no more than two dogs.

Can farmers or landowners be held responsible for offences?

It is an offence for any person to knowingly permit his land to be used or entered for hunting wild animals with dogs. So if you ask a farmer for permission to hunt over his land, he is committing an offence if he agrees.

If a farmer permits draghunting or hunting of the “clean boot” and, once on his land, the hunter, without the farmer’s knowledge, decides to hunt prohibited quarry, the farmer cannot be held responsible — unless it can be proved that he knew what the hunter intended to do.

Can a dog owner be held responsible for committing an offence?

It is an offence to allow a dog belonging to you to be used to hunt wild animals. Again, “hunting” is not defined.

What defences can be used?

A person charged with a hunting offence can argue that he reasonably believed the hunting he did was an exempt form. But remember: ignorance of the law is no excuse.

This defence will also allow rabbit hunters whose dogs inadvertently chase a hare to plead “not guilty”.

What this section emphatically does not do is to enable those hunting to say they did not believe they were doing anything unlawful if they caused their dog to hunt a wild mammal other than under the exceptional circumstances outlined above.

What are the penalties if found guilty?

A fine of up to £5,000. It carries no sentence of imprisonment, but if you fail to pay a fine of £5,000 you must theoretically serve six months in jail. On conviction, the court can order forfeiture of any dog or hunting article that was used in the commission of the offence or was in your possession at the time.

What can the police do?

If you are suspected of hunting, or of preparing to hunt, a policeman can arrest you without a warrant. A police officer can search you, your car or your animal, and can seize and detain any vehicle, animal or other thing. He can enter any building, except a dwelling, to do that.

Where does hare coursing fit in?

It is a separate offence to participate in, attend, or facilitate a “hare coursing event” or to permit one on your land. This does not cover hare coursing by one dog at a time “for the pot”, but only because that is already illegal.

• Clive Rees MH is a master and huntsman of mink hounds, a master of Bloodhounds and a criminal defence lawyer who defends hunting cases across the UK.

This news feature was first published in Horse & Hound (2 December, ’04)

Stay in touch with all the news in the run-up to and throughout the major shows and events during 2026 and beyond with a Horse & Hound subscription. Subscribe today for all you need to know ahead of these major events, plus online reports on the action as it happens from our expert team of reporters and in-depth analysis in our special commemorative magazines. Have a subscription already? Set up your unlimited website access now

A Magistrate has resigned from his post of 19 years because of the hunting ban, which he believes is based on prejudice.

Derek Pearce from the North Avon Magistrates Court is leaving following receipt of a letter from the Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs, Lord Falconer, warning Magistrates that should they break a law, or refuse to enforce it, they would be “incompatible with the requirements of their office”.

Mr Pearce, who followed the Beaufort Hunt yesterday, tendered his resignation because he believes the new law on hunting is unjust. “The expert evidence of the Hunting Enquiries has been disregarded, and prejudice and class-hatred has ruled,” he said.

“The wisdom and experience of the House of Lords has also been disregarded by Labour MPs whose aim is to persecute a minority group. They even now have the gall to openly admit this was their aim. The welfare of animals was irrelevant.

“Sadly, the excellent reputation of our judicial system is seriously undermined when an abuse of power by a Labour Government dictates that a law can be forced into being against all sense and reason. I am not prepared to do their dirty work for them in helping to administer a law based on prejudice.”

A spokeswoman from the Countryside Alliance said: ‘We expect that many other magistrates feel, like Derek Pearce, that they may be unable to implement the Government’s unjust, illiberal and prejudiced piece of legislation. It is a great shame that people like magistrates and policemen are being put in such an impossible position by the Labour Government.”

Stay in touch with all the news in the run-up to and throughout the major shows and events during 2026 and beyond with a Horse & Hound subscription. Subscribe today for all you need to know ahead of these major events, plus online reports on the action as it happens from our expert team of reporters and in-depth analysis in our special commemorative magazines. Have a subscription already? Set up your unlimited website access now

“We will not give up” was the clear message from hunt representatives who attended a series of regional meetings last weekend. Colossal fields have turned out at many meets since the ban was passed, and a particularly big turnout is urged for 19 February — the first Saturday of the ban on traditional forms of hunting.

Masters, hunt staff and secretaries from all areas in England and Wales (except from the north and Wessex, who are meeting this weekend) discussed ways of continuing within the law and of “testing” the new law at the briefings held by the Council of Hunting Associations (CHA).

Some are thinking in terms of a five-year plan — the length of time many consider we must wait for a Conservative government — while others are planning only 12 months ahead.

Alastair Jackson, director of the Masters of Foxhounds Association, told those at the south-east meeting: “Hunts need to provide legal activities for humans and hounds, to finance kennels, retain horses, hounds and hunt staff and keep communities together. We need to maintain as many hunts as we can as legal bodies.”

On the Saturday after the ban — 19 February — hunts plan to meet openly, with hounds and as many mounted and foot followers as possible, and set off across country with the field master. Some will have laid a quarry-based scent. Whether some packs break the law after moving off will be for police to determine.

The CHA stresses it is not promoting illegal action, and urges individuals to take responsibility for themselves, and masters for hunt staff.

“We recommend that Foxhound packs carry out legal activities, such as hunting a fox-based scent or exercising hounds. Packs whose quarry is hare can flush with two dogs or hunt artificial scent or rabbits. Hunts need to use their imagination so that supporters are engaged.”

Read the full story, plus a lawyer’s view on what the Hunting Act 2004 really means, in today’s Horse & Hound (2 December, 04).

Stay in touch with all the news in the run-up to and throughout the major shows and events during 2026 and beyond with a Horse & Hound subscription. Subscribe today for all you need to know ahead of these major events, plus online reports on the action as it happens from our expert team of reporters and in-depth analysis in our special commemorative magazines. Have a subscription already? Set up your unlimited website access now

THE MASTER’S VIEW

Steven Clark, joint-master of the Barlow hounds in Derbyshire and Yorkshire

“Our unofficial plan will be to continue as normal. It depends on the recommendations coming from the Masters of Foxhounds Association and the Council of Hunting Associations, but while farmers and landowners will have us, we will carry on. At the moment, the overwhelming majority will continue to have us.

“In terms of where we’d meet, we could probably carry on as we do now. But where we meet depends on whether we’re looking for maximum publicity in terms of unworkable law or not. I know a few pub landlords who would gladly have us every day of the week if it would help the cause.

“Our local coppers have told us it’s going to be a nightmare, but decisions about policing will be left to higher-ranking officers.

“Certainly, co-ordinated hunting days, or one mass day, could be very effective to demonstrate how stupid the law is and embarrass the government, depending on legal advice as to whether that would jeopardise anything in the courts.

“Also, any action has to be directed at the ban and the ban alone. Our argument is not with Joe Public.

“You can’t affect landowners and farmers adversely, and they must be at the forefront of our minds. Everything we do has to be toward securing a long-term future for hunting.

“Hunt supporters could also report people walking their dogs and clog up the system and police time by asking for crime numbers — if an old lady takes her dog off the lead in the park and it chases a squirrel, she is just as guilty. If we can’t go hunting then neither should anyone else.”

THE POLICE VIEW

Alistair McWhirter, spokesman on hunting with dogs for the Association of Chief Police Officers

McWhirter, also chief constable in Suffolk, envisages that forces will face four types of activity: mass protests and civil disobedience; individual “martyrs” who say: “I’m hunting; arrest me”; hound exercise clubs which may try hunting illegally, and, finally, clandestine hunting.

McWhirter cannot confirm what will happen if thousands defy the law en masse, but adds: “We will enforce the law, but it will be a challenge because of the number of people who have said they will disobey it.”

Neither will McWhirter confirm whether police will use video or helicopters to enforce the law, but he adds: “We’ll use the full range of tools, as we do protecting hunting now. But it’s twaddle that there will be cameras in trees.

“If people want to exercise hounds, that’s lawful. There isn’t an offence until they actually hunt a mammal. But we wouldn’t always know what constitutes hunting — and the police wouldn’t want to get involved in that.

“This law will affect our relationship with rural communities, although of course there are country people who are anti-hunting, too. But many people who hunt are the police’s greatest supporters.

“Anyone cautioned or charged may find it hard to get a firearms certificate. Landowners can be prosecuted if they knowingly allow hunting on their land, as can people who aid and abet.”

Individual forces will decide what resources will be allocated on the basis of need and annual policing policy priorities, which are published by the Home Secretary in

early December.

THE VIEW OF THE RSPCA, LACS and HSA

A spokesman for the RSPCA says: “If the law has been flouted, our inspectors will investigate, but we hope that the majority of hunts will take up draghunting or other legal activities.

“Everything we do begins with a call from a member of the public — that would include hunting.

“At this point, we haven’t had any discussions with the police [regarding the assistance with seizure of horses and hounds], and it will depend on every circumstance, but we will of course assist wherever possible.”

A spokesman for the League Against Cruel Sports (LACS) says: “We’ve always been monitoring hunts — going with video cameras, and individuals will continue to monitor. After 18 February, we’re going to see illegal hunting. We don’t see it as our position to enforce the law, but if we see lawbreaking we will inform the relevant authorities.

“We’re planning demos on Boxing Day. Our membership is 30,000, and hasn’t changed since this began.”

Nathan Brown from the Hunt Saboteurs Association (HSA) says: “We’ll make available all information we can to the police to assist with prosecutions. We’ll continue our efforts in monitoring hunts and make sure we have video cameras to compile evidence that can be used by the police and Crown Prosecution Service.

“We work across the country, so won’t be targeting any areas in particular, but we do a lot in Surrey and the Home Counties.”

Read other peoples’ views about the hunting ban in today’s Horse & Hound (25 November, ’04)

Stay in touch with all the news in the run-up to and throughout the major shows and events during 2026 and beyond with a Horse & Hound subscription. Subscribe today for all you need to know ahead of these major events, plus online reports on the action as it happens from our expert team of reporters and in-depth analysis in our special commemorative magazines. Have a subscription already? Set up your unlimited website access now

The first challenge to the Hunting Act is to be launched today as an application for a Judicial Review is lodged at the High Courts of Justice.

It is based on what the Countryside Alliance (CA) says is the questionable validity of the Parliament Act as it was passed in 1949. Amending the Act back then, MPs decided that the Lords should have less chances to consider legislation on which both houses could not agree. The problem is that this Act was never passed by the Lords.

The challenge is in the names of John Jackson, Patrick Martin and Mair Hughes. Sir Sidney Kentridge QC is leading the case on behalf of the CA.

A second legal challenge to the Hunting Act will claim that the Act contravenes human rights legislation because the absence of compensation provision in the Act fails to account for loss of a way of life. So found the Joint Committee on Human Rights, and this issue was also brought up in the Burns Report.

Both challenges are going to be subjects for debate at the highest level for months, and in the meantime, the hunting community is determined to continue to go about its business. Any arrests made for illegal hunting as these challenges are underway will probably see prosecution deferred, awaiting the outcome of the challenges.

The Countryside Alliance is confident that the Judiciary will find in their favour, and the House of Lords is the highest court in the land. Simon Hart yesterday stressed that this was not the end of the fight, but only the beginning of the second stage.

In the first signs of the campaign of civil disobedience and protest promised by pro-hunt supporters, a 1,000-strong demonstration was staged at the state banquet at Windsor Castle yesterday where the Queen was hosting Prime Minister Tony Blair and the French president, Jacques Chirac.

Stay in touch with all the news in the run-up to and throughout the major shows and events during 2026 and beyond with a Horse & Hound subscription. Subscribe today for all you need to know ahead of these major events, plus online reports on the action as it happens from our expert team of reporters and in-depth analysis in our special commemorative magazines. Have a subscription already? Set up your unlimited website access now

The Parliament Act was used last night to force the Hunting Bill into law. Hunting will now be banned in 90 days time.

After the Lords rejected an amendment made by the Commons to delay the ban for 18 months, leaving the disagreement between the two Houses unresolved, Michael Martin, the Speaker of the House of Commons, invoked the Act for only the fourth time since 1949 to force the Bill onto the statute books.

The bill immediately received royal assent, and is now law. Hunting will be banned in England and Wales from February 18 next year.

Amid confused and chaotic scenes in the Commons yesterday, MPs voted against the Government’s preferred option of delaying the ban until 2007 in favour of an 18-month delay.

Alun Michael, the Rural Affairs Minister, accused the Lords of struggling against the inevitable by behaving like: “turkeys voting for Christmas”.

The Lords voted, by a narrow margin, against the 18-month delay, a move thought to be a conscious effort by pro-hunt peers to make the ban an issue in time for the general election.

MPs disagreed, and as a result, Peter Hain invoked the Parliament Act, requiring that the original Government Bill was passed into law.

Conservatives have pledged to overturn the ban if they win the election. Conservative Minister James Gray said: “I look forward to the opportunity to propose the repeal of this disgraceful, prejudiced and ignorant little bill.”

Simon Hart of the Countryside Alliance, which is planning to launch two legal challenges against the ban, expressed his fury at the scenes in Parliament: “The chaos and deceit that has surrounded today’s events is a fitting finale to what has been one of the most ridiculous, dishonest and time-consuming episodes in Parliamentary history.

“The Government’s behaviour, and its pathetic attempt to shirk responsibility for its actions, has only served to bring it further into disrepute. We will now launch the next stage of our campaign in the courts, and in the country.”

Stay in touch with all the news in the run-up to and throughout the major shows and events during 2026 and beyond with a Horse & Hound subscription. Subscribe today for all you need to know ahead of these major events, plus online reports on the action as it happens from our expert team of reporters and in-depth analysis in our special commemorative magazines. Have a subscription already? Set up your unlimited website access now

John Jackson and Simon Hart have outlined the Countryside Alliance’s plans for the coming months in anticipation of the Speaker invoking the Parliament Act today.

John Jackson said there will be three main ways the CA, and its members, will challenge the ban:

• A political challenge
• Two legal challenges
• The practical element

The political challenge will consist of the alliance encouraging all citizens, not just rural dwellers, to show their disgust for legislation based on prejudice by using their votes at the next election. He said he expects many people would rather have the majority of the members of the House of Commons value liberty than prejudice. The alliance has already vowed to target anti-hunting Labour MPs in minority seats.

A legal challenge is set to go into motion as soon as the Parliament Act is invoked, and this is a challenge to the validity the Parliament Act, which was passed in 1949. The Alliance is going to argue that it was passed unlawfully, and if the challenge gets accepted this could provoke one of the greatest constitutional crises this country has seen. This case, interestingly, would likely end up in the House of Lords, in its capacity as highest court in the land.

A second legal challenge is also due to be launched, should this fail, on the grounds that the Hunting Act contravenes the Human Rights Act.

The third element involves members of the alliance, and people living in the countryside refusing to cooperate with certain government departments. For instance this might mean landowners refusing to let the Ministry of Defence continue to conduct tests on their land.

This tactic is known as “passive non-cooperation” and involves action within the law to make people’s feelings known.

However, Mr Jackson also commented that civil disobedience is on the horizon: “We have tried, and the House of Lords has tried to find a rational solution to this, but the government has refused to listen.

“Breaking the law is wrong, but civil rights leaders have said for years that if there is an unfair law, then it is proper for the individual to draw attention to this unfairness by breaking it, and then coming forward to accept their punishment.”

He said the country must expect a vigorous reaction from the hunting community, should the Parliament Act be used tomorrow, and indicated that the alliance and its supporters are very far from backing down on this issue.

This is supported by the findings of our current survey (right), in which 60% of Horse & Hound Online users say they are prepared to risk going to prison by continuing to hunt if a ban is put in place.

Stay in touch with all the news in the run-up to and throughout the major shows and events during 2026 and beyond with a Horse & Hound subscription. Subscribe today for all you need to know ahead of these major events, plus online reports on the action as it happens from our expert team of reporters and in-depth analysis in our special commemorative magazines. Have a subscription already? Set up your unlimited website access now

17 November 2004

A ban on fox hunting in England and Wales now looks inevitable after MPs last night rejected attempts to reach a compromise which would allow a system of licensed hunting. The proposals made by the House of Lords on Monday night were rejected by MPs by 344 votes to 173.

16 November 2004

Tony Blair made a last minute effort to reach a compromise on hunting last night as the Bill finished its final stage in the Lords with several amendments, all of which are likely to be rejected by the Commons.

The Lords have voted to extend the delay on a ban by three years instead of the two-year delay proposed by the Government. If this is rejected, the ban could come into force within three months, making it an issue during the General Election campaign.

They also amended the Bill to allow hare coursing and stag hunting to continue under a licensing system, making it almost identical to the original Government Bill, known as the ‘Alun Michael Bill’, and proposed that any hunting ban should be decided by the Secretary of State and not MPs.

A Downing Street spokesman said that although the Commons vote would be without a whip, Mr Blair would vote for a compromise, favouring strict regulation over an outright ban: “The Prime Minister will be voting for restitution of the ‘Alun Michael Bill’. The Prime Minister believes it is right to indicate the degree of support for a compromise,” he said.

The Bill returns to the Commons today (Tuesday), where MPs are expected to overturn all of the Lords’ amendments. Tomorrow (Wednesday) the Lords are likely to disagree and therefore, unless a compromise has been reached, the Speaker Michael Martin will invoke the Parliament Act to force the Bill into law on Thursday when the current parliamentary session ends.

If the Parliament Act is used, the Commons must pass the original Bill which includes no delay on a ban, making this season’s hunting the last. This is likely to make hunting a significant issue for the General Election, expected next year. The only way the Government can get round this is to introduce a new Bill in the Queen’s Speech later this month implementing a separate delay on the ban.

In the event of a ban, the Countryside Alliance plans to launch legal challenges against both the use of the Parliament Act and against the ban itself, arguing that it would constitute a human rights infringement.

Countryside Alliance Chief Executive Simon Hart said: “The majority of the public favours the continuation of hunting in some form. The hunting community is prepared to compromise, Tony Blair has stated his support for a compromise and the Lords have produced a compromise.

“When the Lords’ registration amendments go before the Commons later today it is up to the Prime Minister and the rest of the Commons to ensure that a few vociferous Labour backbenchers do not stand in the way of a democratic solution.”

Meanwhile about 30 pro-hunting women protestors chained themselves to railings outside Parliament today, in an effort to communicate the strength of feeling in the countryside on this matter.

“They need to listen without prejudice,” one protestor said. The protest has so far been peaceful and there have been no arrests.

Stay in touch with all the news in the run-up to and throughout the major shows and events during 2026 and beyond with a Horse & Hound subscription. Subscribe today for all you need to know ahead of these major events, plus online reports on the action as it happens from our expert team of reporters and in-depth analysis in our special commemorative magazines. Have a subscription already? Set up your unlimited website access now

A cross-party group of peers officially announced today their plans to return the Hunting Bill to its original form during the Committee Stage debate on the Hunting Bill next week.

Lord Donoughue (Labour), Lord Livsey (Liberal Democrat), Lord Mancroft (Conservative) and Jim Barrington, an advisor from the Middle Way Group, stated that the Hunting Bill is no longer a matter of party politics and presented a united front.

The group said that they plan to return the bill to its previous form, as originally introduced by Alun Michael in 2002, during the three consecutive days next week tabled for discussion in the Lords.

Lord Donoughue said that their reasons were simply that the current Bill will not diminish cruelty to animals, but instead increase it.

The only departure from the original Bill will be an extra clause adding new obligations on wildlife management, in accordance with the EU Habitats Directive and other international commitments to which the Government is signed up.

“We will return the original Bill, or what is as close as humanly possible to the original Bill, to the Commons and then it is up to the Government. In my experience Prime Ministers can do quite extraordinary things, if they want to,” Lord Donoughue said.

“We cannot predict what will happen, but we will consider our work done when we have managed to amend the Bill as we see fit. However, I would like to point out that were this situation not so serious for the countryside and everybody who lives there, and their livelihoods, it would be farcical.”

Lord Mancroft spoke out about the unprecedented way in which this legislation is being forged: “The Parliament Act has been used four times in past 50 years, which means that the Commons and the Lords almost never disagree. This is because the means of resolving the differences between the two houses is compromise. This is how our political system works, and has done for centuries. To change this for a Bill which most people consider to concern a fringe issue is very surprising.”

Last year, the Hunting Bill sat in the Commons for 14 weeks for no reason before it passed to the Lords, ensuring that Peers had very limited time to debate it. The Government seems determined to leave the issue to the last minute again. The report stage has not yet been officially confirmed, and the Committee stage in the Lords has had to be squeezed into three consecutive days.

This year, however, the peers are prepared. And they, as a cross-party group, know what they want.

“If the Government does not give us a report stage to complete our work, I think the public will be extremely angry,” said Lord Mancroft.

And if the Parliament Act is invoked, and a ban is in place by Boxing Day?

“Then the Government will have to deal with the fact that this is not robust legislation, and that people in the countryside are not going to take the destruction of their ways of life lying down. But that is not a matter for us. We are doing our bit. After that, we have to wait and see what happens,” Lord Donoughue concluded.

Stay in touch with all the news in the run-up to and throughout the major shows and events during 2026 and beyond with a Horse & Hound subscription. Subscribe today for all you need to know ahead of these major events, plus online reports on the action as it happens from our expert team of reporters and in-depth analysis in our special commemorative magazines. Have a subscription already? Set up your unlimited website access now

Show your support

The Countryside Alliance has introduced a pro-hunting rubber wristband which is half red and half green and bears the message BAN THE BAN. They are available from CA stands at point-to-points and county shows throughout the country, on on their website at www.countryside-alliance.org for a voluntary donation of £10 for four.

Simon Hart says: “In recent months wrist bands have become increasingly popular as a cheap and highly visible way of supporting a cause, and we have already had a great response to our version.

“Not only are wearers sending a clear message of their determination to fight the Hunting Act, but on a practical level they are contributing financially to our legal challenges, helping our campaign where it is most needed. No supporter of hunting, whether young or old, should be without an Alliance wristband this year. Wear your wristband and show support for your sport.”

• Click hear to read about initativies to raise funds to cover the legal costs of the “Westminster Eight”.Challenges and injunctionsThe Countryside Alliance-backed challenge to the Hunting Act on human rights grounds will be heard in the High Court the week of 4 July, alongside a case brought under EU law on free movement of goods and workers by nine people.The nine, which include an Irish horse dealer and breeder, a West Country hireling operator, a Belgian-based Viscount, plus Portuguese and German hunting enthusiasts, will say that their rights have been infringed in a disproportionate manner.A procedural hearing was held last week relating to the CA human rights challenge. Mr Justice Collins, sitting at the High Court, said their case, which is being handled by David Anderson QC, should be heard with that brought by UK campaigners.Anderson is seeking an order to quash the Hunting Act or a declaration that it is of no effect and should not be enforced.Read the full story >>Older newsThe Vote-OK campaign has been doing stirling work in the run up to the election, rallying support from hunt supporters across the country to help stuff envelopes; put up posters; pound the pavements, leafleting and canvassing. For more details about what you can do visit: www.vote-ok.co.ukThe Countryside Alliance has launched a Cyber Protest against the Hunting Act. It is described as “an online demonstration designed to enable many thousands of people across the world to show their opposition to the state’s unwarranted interference into the lives of ordinary.” To sign up visit www.fightprejudice.orgYou can also help by donating to the CA’s Legal Challenge appeal, which will help cover the cost of the legal appeals. Visit www.countrysidealliance.org and follow the links.The Countryside Alliance has had a massive increase in membership since the hunting ban was announced. In all, more than 6,500 new memberships have been signed since September, with “memberships” including families and couples as well as individuals, so the real head count will be higher.The RSPCA has signed up three anti-hunting MPs — Ann Widdecombe, Ian Cawsey and Norman Baker — as vice-presidents. It has also appointed anti-hunting MEP Dr Caroline Lucas, bringing the number of vice-presidents to 20.Protests against the ban
• Pro-hunting protesters attended the Labour Party Spring Conference in Gateshead, Newcastle upon Tyne, to demonstrate the resistance and anger that exists against the government for forcing the Hunting Act into law.
• Hunt supporters surrounded the RSPCA’s HQ near Horsham with Fight the Ban placards on Christmas morning. The signs were not removed until late afternoon.
• Record crowds of 300,000 flocked to Boxing Day meets — some 30,000 more than in 2003. Snow, sub-zero temperatures and icy roads did not deter the public from turning up in droves.
• One London-based hunt supporter is fast becoming a legend at the H&H office because of the brilliant accounts he sends in about his exploits lecturing MPs. Finding time during his busy schedule, our friend — who wishes to remain anonymous — wanders into meetings involving ministers or anti-hunt MPs, as if he belongs there. He then politely makes his views known. Read more about this supporter’s exploits in H&H (30 December, ’04)
• The Paralympic dressage team and support staff, wearing “keep hunting” badges, attended a reception hosted by Tony and Cherie Blair at Lords cricket ground to celebrate UK sporting achievements in Athens, and in support of the London 2012 bid. Performance manager and chef d’equipe in Athens David Hunter says some of the riders and staff wondered whether to boycott the event in protest.“In the end, we decided it would give us an opportunity to make a polite stand on the issue of hunting. We proudly wore our CA badges. We were introduced to Tony Blair and Tessa Jowell, neither of whom could fail to miss our support for hunting. It was polite and civilised, but we certainly got our point across.”
• Young hunt supporters have been galvanising support at their schools. A 17-year-old girl at St Swithun’s, Winchester, organised a petition. “I collected 300 signatures — a majority of pupils,” she explains.
• Meanwhile, at Eton’s St Andrew’s Day playing of The Wall Game, a 17-year-old pupil and his friends managed to cover the top of the wall with boys carrying “Fight Prejudice” banners.
• A London schoolboy of 13 told Horse & Hound of his uphill battle to convince city-based schoolfriends that hunting is not cruel.“When I told my friends on Monday that I’d been hunting, they didn’t believe me at first. Several said it served me right that it was getting banned, but I did persuade one of them. Everyone had thought it was sweet I had ponies, but when they found out that the ponies’ favourite thing was a day out hunting, it shocked them.”
• An online petition to support hunting has been signed by more than 19,000 people. See www.petitiononline.com/tallyh0/petition.html
• Rural Affairs Minister Alun Michael cancelled an engagement to address a Rural Social Enterprise Conference at Todmorden Town Hall, West Yorkshire on 24 November after more than 200 rural campaigners gathered at short notice to protest about the hunting ban.CA chief executive Simon Hart said: “This is about what we would have expected from Alun Michael, who has failed to show any consistency or integrity on the issue of hunting. It is a sorry state of affairs when a DEFRA minister avoids the countryside because he cannot face up to his responsibilities. There can never have been a Rural Affairs Minister who is more out of touch with rural Britain“.
• Members of the Masters of Foxhounds Association of America (MFHA USA) gathered in Lafeyette Square and then at the White House in Washington last Friday to welcome Tony Blair, who went to visit the newly re-elected President Bush. MFHA USA was keen to remind Mr Blair of its concerns over the hunting Bill, as well as to show its support of the British hunting community and its opposition to a ban.
• Over 1000 people took part in the fifth and final cabinet picket last Thursday, which coincided with Armistice Day. The picket was suspended during the service, with the two minute silence immaculately observed by the group, who proudly wore their poppies in rememberance of those who laid down their lives for their country.
• About 700 supporters gathered on 5 November at Melton Mowbray airfield for a symbolic burning of the Hunting Bill. Huntsmen blew Gone Away as the bonfire was lit.
• When Alistair Darling tried to dodge protestors in Birmingham recently, he is said to have driven the wrong way along “at least three” one-way streets. “Not very appropriate for the minister of transport…” says a CA spokesman.
• Rob Williams, 29, who hunts with the Tiverton Staghounds, rode to Buckingham Palace to give a letter to The Queen. He set out in mid-October on his hunter, Dakkers.
  Williams says: “I set off without an itinerary, unannounced. My letter reflected the support I received on the way. I was treated like a king, and Dakkers was fatter by the end than when we began.”
• In Grimsby, DEFRA secretary of state Margaret Beckett told demonstrators that she never wanted a ban and admitted that backbenchers were motivated by prejudice.
• Two of John Prescott’s constituents who follow the Holderness, Kevin and Josie Jackson, spent 20min with him at his weekly surgery. Kevin says: “We asked him if he had followed a hunt and he said he had no need to because he had seen photographs.”
• Leader of the Commons Peter Hain gave the lie to his alleged desire for dialogue with hunt supporters by ignoring a group in Wales. They wondered why, despite his recent requests asking hunt supporters to “make the case”, he was not enabling them to do so.
• More than 50 people have signed up to work as campaign volunteers for pro-hunting Conservative Graham Stuart, to ensure that the narrowly held seat of the Beverley and Holderness constituency does not fall to Labour.
• National newcomers week (9-16 October) attracted 5,000 people to hunting for the first time — 2,000 more than last year. Record turnouts were reported from the 149 hunts that took part in the initiative.

Have you been to see an anti-hunting MP, picketed a minister or talked your way into an official gathering to protest? Let us know how you have been keeping up the pressure, e-mail: abi_butcher@ipcmedia.com

WHAT YOU CAN DO

• If you hear that a minister is due to visit your area, contact the CA Action Office
• Keep in touch with your CA regional director and hunt campaigner for details of local action
• Use and distribute car stickers, correx boards and posters. Order them via the CA website or from the action office
• Lobby the House of Lords. See the website or contact your regional director for your county allocation of peers
• Keep in touch with your local hunt to find out about the role you can play in the political process as we approach the next general election
• For further details (tel: 01367 850488) or e-mail actionoffice@countryside-alliance.org (www.countryside-alliance.org)
• Write to the Prime Minister (Rt Hon Tony Blair MP, House of Commons, London SW1A 0AA or Myrobella, Farfield Terrace, Trimdon Colliery, Co Durham) and copying a national paper such as The Sun (Dear Sun, The Sun, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1SL; letters@the-sun.co.uk).
• Lobby cabinet ministers whenever they are in your region. The CA says that this is one of the single most essential activities.
• Contact your local Chief Constable to fix a visit to discuss enforcement and relationships with the rural community. Remember to ask him or her about using CCTV to catch people hunting!

Huntsmen, farmers, gamekeepers, supporters, firemen, teachers and nurses were among the 20,000 people who travelled to London today to make known their feelings on the Hunting Bill.

As MPs inside the House of Commons voted to pass all of the stages of the Hunting Bill in a single day by a large majority, protestors outside were addressed by various luminaries, from actors to teenage girls, in support of their way of life.

Explorer, Sir Ranulph Fiennes, told the crowd: “This [vote] is about hypocrisy and the creeping degradation of democracy, not about hunting.”

Supporters heard how people’s lives would be affected by a ban, as well as being entertained by some young ladies who were keen to say “tits to Mr Blair”. The crowd continued chanting “No Ban” throughout the day, and speaker after speaker were cheered as they acknowledged that however long a fight would take, they would do whatever was necessary.

Baroness Mallalieu said that even if a ban is passed, the Countryside Alliance could have the case in the courts by Christmas, with a view to taking it on to the European Court of Human Rights.

“The reason this didn’t work in Scotland is that the Court said: ‘well you’re still hunting, so why overturn the Act’. This Bill is a very different matter,” she said.

When actor Jeremy Irons took the stage, he told the crowd that although he had helped to elect the Labour Government in 1997, he was ashamed to admit it and would not be repeating the same mistake. The crowd cheered louder than ever at this statement and spirits were high as a sing along was instigated by a fireman from Worcestershire called Michael Keel.

There was also what the Metropolitan Police called “a scuffle” outside the Houses of Parliament as a pocket of people strained to escape from the confines of the protest and displayed their anger too forcefully. Riot police were called in to contain the situation.

Meanwhile the Commons was suspended as a group of five young men in white t-shirts broke into the Chamber and harangued Alun Michael. The men were arrested and have been taken off for questioning. Many people are calling it the most serious breach of Commons security in living memory.

Simon Hart of the Countryside Alliance said: “The scenes of disruption in Westminster are unfortunate and unnecessary, but when the Labour party is destroying people’s lives in some perverted game of political football, they are not surprising.

“We do not condone any lawbreaking of any kind, but Defra Minister Alun Michael inflamed the situation this morning by admitting that the government is banning hunting as part of some sort of electoral game”.

The Bill was supported by the majority of MPs with 356 votes in favour to 166 against. The government’s amendment, which will delay the ban on hunting until July 2006, was also strongly supported with 342 votes to 15. Tony Blair did not vote. The Bill and the amendment will now pass to the House of Lords.

Stay in touch with all the news in the run-up to and throughout the major shows and events during 2026 and beyond with a Horse & Hound subscription. Subscribe today for all you need to know ahead of these major events, plus online reports on the action as it happens from our expert team of reporters and in-depth analysis in our special commemorative magazines. Have a subscription already? Set up your unlimited website access now

At least 10,000 people are expected to voice their anger at the reintroduction of the Hunting Bill by taking part in tomorrow’s pro-hunting demonstration in Parliament Square, outside the House of Commons.

The demonstration will begin at 12noon and continue throughout the afternoon and into the evening to coincide with the MPs debate and vote on the Bill and any amendments. Expected amendments include the government’s two-year delay in the implementation of a ban, although motions for shorter or longer delays could also be tabled.

These amendments will not change the text of the Hunting Bill, but if passed would be sent to the House of Lords along with the Bill. This way the government retains the option to use the Parliament Act, which can only be used on the same Bill that left the Commons last July in the future, if necessary.

A number of MPs and senior members of the Countryside Alliance (CA) will be speaking to the crowd during the demonstration. Demonstrators will also be able to hear parts of the parliamentary debate, which will be relayed to the public in the square over a tanoy system.

Hunt supporters are being encouraged to attend wearing green and red clothing and bring hunting horns, whistles and klaxons with them. Placards stating “Fight Prejudice — Fight the Hunting Ban” will be available in Parliament Square. The CA has asked people not to bring animals with them and to help make the event “large, forceful and lawful”.

Tim Bonner of the Countryside Alliance told HHO: “Targeted, strong and determined protest can have a direct effect on those who are imposing this legislation on us, as recent demonstrations directed at Tony Blair have shown. If we fail to address the people who are attacking us, and upset the people who are showing us support, we will be making a serious mistake.”

For more details of the demonstration visit: www.countrysidealliance.com

• Bonfires spelling out the words “NO BAN” were lit around the country last night as a curtain raiser to the CA’s protest in Parliament Square tomorrow.
• Future protests include a major demonstration outside the Labour Party Conference in Brighton on Tuesday 28 September. There will be no hunting in England or Wales on this date to ensure the maximum possible turnout.

Stay in touch with all the news in the run-up to and throughout the major shows and events during 2026 and beyond with a Horse & Hound subscription. Subscribe today for all you need to know ahead of these major events, plus online reports on the action as it happens from our expert team of reporters and in-depth analysis in our special commemorative magazines. Have a subscription already? Set up your unlimited website access now

Policing any kind of ban on hunting has long been considered a near-impossibility, with figures in the region of £30million quoted as the requisite funding for any successful scheme.

But following confirmation that the Hunting Bill is to be pushed through the Commons in a day next Wednesday, the Home Office have begun to look at the thorny issue of how a ban could possibly be implemented without deploying hundreds of extra forces in rural areas.

The answer, officials have decided, is closed circuit television. Police will spy on what they consider to be ‘main hunting routes’ in rural areas using CCTV. The suggestion has however, sparked ridicule from some directions.

“If CCTV doesn’t stop crime in urban areas where they have a camera every fifty yards, it is farcical to imagine that it would have any effect in the countryside,” said a spokesman for the Countryside Alliance.

Meanwhile, many farmers throughout the country have threatened to refuse to allow Ministry of Defence activity on their land should a hunting ban become law. A spokesman for the MoD was unclear of the true implications of such a threat, but admitted that it could potentially cause some disruption for the department.

“My understanding is that the vast majority of military manoeuvres are carried out on MoD-owned land,” he said. “However, there are instances when a necessity to use private land would come into play, but it is currently not clear how much significance we can attach to this threat.

“If private property were no longer available, the department would need to take a view on further implications for the department.”

• A peaceful protest by hunt supporters caused some disruption for the Blairs at Chequers. Cherie was celebrating her 50th birthday party at the Blairs’ Berkshire residence, but as tractors and trailers blocked all entrances, guests eventually had to be shipped through in undignified fashion in police vans, parking their more upmarket vehicles in the local supermarket car park.

Stay in touch with all the news in the run-up to and throughout the major shows and events during 2026 and beyond with a Horse & Hound subscription. Subscribe today for all you need to know ahead of these major events, plus online reports on the action as it happens from our expert team of reporters and in-depth analysis in our special commemorative magazines. Have a subscription already? Set up your unlimited website access now