The High Court has ruled this morning that prosecutions under the Hunting Act should be handled as “innocent until proven guilty”.

The landmark judgment will affect all prosecutions under the Hunting Act from now on, and some retrospectively, including that of Exmoor huntsman Tony Wright.

Mr Wright won his appeal against a conviction for unlawful hunting but in December the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) asked for clarification of the points of law used to win his case.

Now two top judges have agreed the CPS must prove hunts have broken the law and the Countryside Alliance says the ruling will make the prosecution of many offences brought under the Hunting Act “much more difficult”.

The High Court was asked to decide whether hunts have a right to say they are “innocent until proven guilty” when claiming the defence of hunting under an exemption, and what is meant by “hunting”.

Speaking to H&H this morning Exmoor huntsman Tony Wright said he was hugely relieved a case that had dragged on for three years was now over.

“I’m delighted and hope it will have a positive effect on the cases still to be heard,” he said.

“I don’t know if this is the end of it, but it is a relief that things have turned out this way. It has been a long time to endure, but it has been worth it.”

“It has at least helped to put several nails in the coffin of the Hunting Act.”

• See next week’s issue of Horse & Hound (12 February) for full reaction to the judgment, what it means for hunts and the future that lies ahead.

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

Top judges will spend the Christmas period grappling with questions that will affect all prosecutions under the Hunting Act 2004, following a hearing in London on 16 December.

Lord Justice May and Mr Justice Maddison must decide whether hunts have a right to say they are “innocent until proven guilty” when claiming the defence of hunting under an exemption, and what is meant by “hunting”.

The questions have arisen because of anomalies thrown up during the prosecutions of Exmoor huntsman Tony Wright and three hunt staff of the Devon and Somerset Staghounds (D&S) (news, 3 January).

Judge Graham Cottle cleared Mr Wright, the first person to be prosecuted under the Hunting Act, on appeal at Exeter Crown Court on 30 November 2007, ruling that the prosecution had to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that the huntsman was not hunting under an exemption — in this case, culling a fox that was predating livestock (news, 6 December 2007).

But the following week, Judge David Parsons at Taunton Magistrates Court took the opposite view, saying the D&S had to prove their actions were within the law.

Their trial was halted and the Director of Public Prosecutions asked the High Court to sort out the confusion.

The judges must also decide upon a definition of hunting and whether searching for an animal is “hunting” under the Act.

Kerry Barker, representing the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), told the court: “If the aim of the Act is to prevent hunting with dogs, a man who takes out his dogs with the intention of hunting a wild mammal knows his actions are unlawful unless he is acting under one or more of the exemptions.”

He said the Act should come into force the moment a person sets out with the intention of hunting, rather than once a pursuit is under way.

The crown also claims prosecutions fail to get to court because it is too difficult for prosecutors to guess which exemption will be claimed by the accused and therefore the burden of proof should be on the accused to prove their innocence.

“This Act prohibits the hunting of a wild mammal with dogs unless in exempt circumstances, therefore the burden of proof is on the defence to prove their exemption,” he said.

But Philip Mott QC, representing the hunts, said: “If the CPS wishes to extend the meaning of hunting to include preparatory acts, where does that leave the exemptions? It would need a total re-modelling of the Act.

“If we take the hunting of rabbits, it would mean that the hunting of rabbits was exempt, but it was unlawful to search for a rabbit.”

The judges will lay down their decision early next year.

Their ruling will have a bearing on the cases of the Isle of Wight Foxhounds (news, 28 June 2007), the Heythrop (news, 28 May) and allegations of hare coursing and hunting levelled at racehorse trainer Sir Mark Prescott and Clarissa Dickson Wright (news, 4 October 2007).

But the verdict in Tony Wright’s case will not change, whatever the judges’ decision, as Judge Cottle deemed he “reasonably believed that the hunting was exempt”.

➤ Just 41 MPs have signed an early day motion brought by MP John McDonnell —one of the architects of the Hunting Act — on 4 December calling for a “reckless behaviour” clause to be added to the 2004 Act.

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

Exmoor huntsman Tony Wright last week won his appeal against his 2006 conviction of hunting illegally.

Exeter County Court Judge Graham Cottle said he believed Wright had made “every effort to comply” with the Hunting Act. But significantly for other hunts facing court action over illegal hunting, the judge decided at the start of the appeal that it was up to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) to prove that Tony Wright was not hunting within an exemption, rather than putting the onus on Mr Wright to prove that he was.

“Judge Cottle’s decision has restored our faith in the judicial system because Tony Wright was always innocent,” said Stephen Lambert, chairman of the Council of Hunting Associations (CHA). “The decision has cheered people up a lot — for the first time it would seem that the judge was actually interested in the facts.”

He added: “It highlights how complicated the Hunting Act is, but we must not become complacent about this. It is still in force, and it does still have teeth.”

Tony Wright echoed his sentiments: “The future is bright for hunting, and this proves we all have to work together.”

He added: “The judge was annoyed the law is such a mess.”

Judge Cottle’s decision about the burden of proof contrasted with the Quantock Staghounds’ appeal at Taunton Crown Court in October. Then Mr Justice Wyn Williams ruled that it was up to the defendants, huntsman Richard Down and amateur whipper-in Adrian Pillivant, to prove that they were hunting within the law.

Solicitor Tim Ryan of Knights solicitors, who represented Tony Wright, told H&H: “This is very good news for Tony Wright, and while the decision doesn’t set a binding precedent, a county court judge has given his opinion on the burden of evidence and he’s the most senior judge to have ruled on the matter so far.”

The question of who should bear the burden of proof has had barristers and judges scratching their heads across the country, and will now be decided by London’s High Court.

“While only the Exmoor Foxhounds and the staghound packs are using the two hounds exemption, where the burden of proof lies is a fundamental point to all exempt hunting cases,” said Countryside Alliance (CA) spokesman Tim Bonner.

Last week, the Crown Prosecution Service’s (CPS) prosecution of four men connected to the Devon and Somerset Staghounds (D&S) at Taunton Magistrates Court was adjourned because barristers for both sides agreed the case should not proceed until clarification from the High Court is given on where the burden of proof lies.

District Judge Parsons at Taunton Magistrates Court will give a decision on the burden of evidence next week. It has been agreed between D&S solicitor Tim Hayden and the CPS legal team that whoever loses will appeal the decision to the High Court.

Tim Ryan added: “I can’t see the CPS or League Against Cruel Sports (LACS) bringing another prosecution where this issue is concerned until the High Court has ruled.”

And while the CPS considers whether to appeal against Judge Cottle’s decision, CA president Baroness Mallalieu QC told H&H she believes the only prospect of appeal in the case is the question of where burden of proof lies.

“Nobody seems quite sure, and it will be very interesting to see what happens,” she said. “But it will not affect Tony Wright either way, he has now been acquitted.”

And with three further prosecutions concerning four more exemptions, the question of burden of evidence will become ever more pertinent.

While both the Exmoor Foxhounds and Quantock Staghounds cases hinged on the exemption of flushing to guns using two hounds, the D&S case involves the exemptions of rescue and of research and observation.

A case against the Isle of Wight hunt centres on the exemption allowing hunting to take place with a bird of prey and was due to be heard two weeks ago. It has also been adjourned until the burden of evidence point is clarified.

LACS spokesman Barry Hugill told H&H that it is urging the CPS to appeal Judge Cottle’s decision. It originally brought the prosecution against Tony Wright privately, but the appeal case was taken on by the CPS.

“We anticipate there will be an appeal,” he said, “and we will have the option to intervene and be party to it should we choose to. We will make that decision at a later date.”

To rumours that LACS has spent £100,000 on the Tony Wright case he added: “That’s not true, but whatever we spent on it, we don’t regret a single penny.”

This news story was first published in Horse & Hound (6 December, ’07)

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 observe at the outset that the experience of this case has led us to the conclusion that the relevant law is far from simple to interpret or to apply; it seems to us that any given set of facts may be susceptible to differing interpretations. The result is an unhappy state of affairs which leaves all those involved in a position of uncertainty…

The question as to whether in any given situation “hunting” is taking place seems to us to be open to different interpretations.

This raises a number of questions; for example, is a fox being “hunted” from the moment it breaks cover and a pursuit begins? Does it only become “hunting” after the pursuit has been continuing for a certain length of time? If so, how long? If the huntsman, once aware of the pursuit, brings the hounds under control as soon as reasonably possible, does what has gone on before constitute “hunting”?

It seems to us the answer to these questions, and probably others will, or may, depend upon individual interpretations, the scope for which clearly exists…

The fact that an honest attempt to secure a particular outcome fails does not necessarily mean that reasonable steps were not taken to secure that outcome.

We consider that it is important to decide on this issue whether the Exmoor Foxhounds approached the new era of hunting with a cynical intention to disregard it and flout it, or, whether there was a genuine wish to try to keep within the law while at the same time continuing something of the traditions of the hunt.

During this appeal we have enjoyed an extended opportunity to observe and to hear from [Tony Wright] and we have no doubt that he and the master of the hunt genuinely wished to comply with the Act; we do not consider that either of them was simply paying lip-service to the obligation to comply.

On that day, with the benefit of hindsight, the arrangements in place may not have been sufficient to ensure full compliance with the Act, but we are satisfied that the appellant has proved that he reasonably believed, perhaps optimistically, that he had put in place the safeguards that he thought would ensure compliance with the requirements of the Act.

For further analysis of the case, read this week’s issue of Horse & Hound (6 December, ’07)

The hunting community has restored faith in the British Judicial system, following the overturning of Tony Wright’s conviction for illegal hunting.

Last Friday, Exmoor huntsman Tony Wright was found not guilty of hunting a mammal with dogs. He was the first huntsman to be convicted of breaching the Hunting Act, in August 2006. It was a prosecution brought privately by the League Against Cruel Sports (LACS).

Last Friday, Mr Wright was cleared of hunting illegally by Judge Graham Cottle sitting in Exeter Crown Court.

Stephen Lambert, chairman of the Masters of Foxhounds Association told H&H: “It has restored our faith in the judicial system because Tony Wright was always innocent. He’d set out to hunt completely within the law, the verdict, even if you’re biased as we are, is the correct one.

“This judgement highlights how complicated and difficult the Hunting Act is, and the difficulties hunt staff have to work with. Judge Cottle shares our views that the Hunting Act is a very bad piece of legislation.”

Speaking exclusively to H&H, Tony Wright said it was a relief that the case is over.

“It’s a relief, that’s the big thing. It’s nice that it’s all over, but it’s nice that I am proved to be an innocent man, which I have always said I was,” he said.

“If anything has come out of my two cases it has proved that the law is very vague on a number of points.

“There was no way that I would break the law. I didn’t want to put the future of our hounds in jeopardy, so why would I have gone out to flout the law?”

Read an extract of Judge Cottle’s statement

For further analysis of the case, read this week’s issue of Horse & Hound (6 December, ’07)

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 huntsman prosecuted under the Hunting Act has today had his conviction overturned on appeal.

Tony Wright, huntsman of the Exmoor Foxhounds, appeared in Exeter Crown Court at 2pm, where the judgment was delivered by Judge Cottle.

In his conclusion, the Judge stated: “During this appeal we have enjoyed an extended opportunity to observe and to hear from the appellant [Tony Wright]. And we have no doubt that he and the master of the hunt genuinely wished to comply with the Act.

“On that day, with the benefit of hindsight, the arrangements in place may not have been sufficient to ensure compliance with the Act but we are satisfied that the appellant has proved that he reasonably believed, perhaps optimistically, that he had put in place the safeguard that would ensure compliance with the Act.”

Tony Wright was found guilty last August at Barnstaple Magistrates Court, in a prosecution brought privately by the League Against Cruel Sports (LACS).

The case hinged on an exemption under the Act that allows two hounds to flush foxes to be shot, which Tony Wright has always maintained he was doing on 29 February 2005.

“We’re delighted that justice has finally been done,” said Stephen Lambert, chairman of the Masters of Foxhounds Association.

“And we’re thrilled and delighted for Tony Wright whose courage and perseverance in this predicament has been quite superb.”

Mr Lambert added: “We are very grateful to our superb legal team.”

Simon Hart, chief executive of the Countryside Alliance, said: “This verdict is an absolute vindication of Tony Wright and the Exmoor Foxhounds and another nail in the coffin of the Hunting Act.

“While we celebrate this judgment, we must not forget why an innocent man faced with a vindictive private prosecution has had to spend over two years and two court cases to clear his name.

“The Hunting Act is not only a pointless and prejudiced piece of legislation, it is also a very bad law. If the courts cannot be sure what is hunting and what is not how on earth can anyone else?

“Only by scrapping the Act can we ensure that other innocent people will not be persecuted and today’s result adds to the clear case for its repeal.”

For full reaction and coverage, see next Thursday’s edition of Horse & Hound.

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 huntsman to be convicted under the Hunting Act 2004 will learn tomorrow whether his appeal has been successful.

At 2pm tomorrow (Friday, 30 November) Exmoor foxhounds huntsman Tony Wright will appear at Exeter Crown Court at 2pm for the judgement.

Tony appealed his conviction last year of hunting a wild mammal with dogs to Exeter Crown Court at the beginning of this month

He was found guilty of hunting illegally in August 2006 by Barnstable Magistrates Court in a prosecution brought privately by the League Against Cruel Sports (LACS).

Visit www.horseandhound.co.uk for the verdict.

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 judge hearing the appeal of the first huntsman to be prosecuted under the Hunting Act 2004 is expected to make his decision early this week.

The appeal case of Exmoor huntsman Tony Wright was heard at Exeter Crown Court last week, and closed last Friday.

Exmoor huntsman Tony Wright was convicted by Barnstable Magistrates Court in August 2006 of hunting a wild mammal with dogs. The prosecution was brought privately by the League Against Cruel Sports (LACS).

The Barnstable judge’s ruling was based on video evidence filmed by LACS on 29 April 2005.

Wright’s appeal hinges on the exemption of flushing a fox using two hounds.

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 huntsman to be prosecuted under the Hunting Act 2004 appeared in court yesterday to appeal his conviction.

Tony Wright, huntsman of the Exmoor Foxhounds, appeared in Exeter Crown Court for the first day of his appeal. Like the Quantock Staghounds case last month, Tony Wright’s appeal hinges on the exemption of flushing a fox using two hounds.

He was convicted by Barnstable Magistrates Court in August 2006 of hunting a wild mammal with dogs, in a prosecution brought privately by the League Against Cruel Sports (LACS).

The Barnstable judge’s ruling was based on video evidence filmed by LACS on 29 April 2005.

Tony Wright’s Exeter Crown Court hearing is likely to last until Thursday, with a reserved judgement expected.

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 appeal of Tony Wright, the first huntsman to be convicted of breaching the Hunting Act (2004), has been adjourned.

The Exmoor huntsman was due to launch his appeal in Exeter Crown Court on Monday (9 July), but yesterday the case was adjourned until September because no judge is currently available.

Mr Wright was convicted last August over an incident alleged to have taken place on 29 April 2005.

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

Exmoor huntsman Tony Wright’s lawyers have lodged an appeal at Exeter Crown Court against his prosecution for illegal hunting. The appeal will be heard later this year, but in the meantime hunts will carry on as before. Devon and Cornwall Police have confirmed the case is not a legislative benchmark: “Nothing has changed as a result of the Wright case,” said Assistant Chief Constable Richard Stowe, adding that hunts across the country have been found to be hunting within the law.

Mr Wright was filmed chasing two foxes across Exmoor along with two hounds. He firmly believes he was hunting within the law and will appeal against the magistrate’s court ruling that fined him £500 and £250 costs. The Countryside Alliance will be supporting Mr Wright’s appeal. “No right-minded person believes that Tony Wright should be branded a criminal,” said a CA spokesperson.

According to Devon and Cornwall Police, Tony Wright’s appeal will help clarify the Hunting Act 2005.”The law hasn’t changed as a result of the prosecution but it could as a result of the appeal. It could bring about case law which would be helpful,” Assistant Chief Constable Stowe told CLO.

The CA believes the outcome has created confusion amongst hunts: “This judgment has created even more confusion over the Hunting Act than before – any law which can put a man like Tony Wright through nine months of court action and tell him he is a criminal for doing something which he believed was entirely legal, clearly isn’t working,” said a spokesperson.

Hunting is not a priority for the Devon and Cornwall Police, Assistant Chief Constable Stowe confirmed. “It is not part of the National Policing Plan,” he said, “There are 33 hunts in Devon and Cornwall, about 10% of the country’s hunts. If we had to police them all it would be very difficult.” But he was keen to point out that violence at hunt meets will not be tolerated. “Whilst I’ve said hunting is not a police priority, violence is,” he warned.

Assistant Chief Constable Stowe was also keen to point out that in the police’s absence ‘monitors’ do not have a special status. “There is nothing illegal about someone filming a hunt but they have no special status,” he confirmed.

Police forces across the country have reported the majority of hunts are operating within the law. “There have been 30 allegations of illegal hunting in Devon and Cornwall and none of them have been sent to the Crime Prosecution Service,” added Stowe.

Tony Wright’s case was brought to court as a private prosecution by the League Against Cruel Sports at a cost of £65,000 after Avon and Somerset Police dismissed it based on the evidence available.

During the week-long hearing Mr Wright denied breaching the Hunting Act when he led the Exmoor Foxhounds at Drybridge in Devon on 29 April, 2005. Despite evidence that he was trying to comply with the conditions for “exempt hunting” (that he was accompanied by two hounds and a marksman to shoot the fox), the judge found Mr Wright guilty. His appeal is due to be heard this autumn.

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

Tony Wright relied on the defence that he reasonably believed the hunting was exempt. The burden of proving that defence rested on him: it was not for the prosecution to disprove it. There were five conditions, all of which Mr Wright had to prove in order to be acquitted:

• The flushing out by his hounds was undertaken to prevent or reduce serious damage the fox would cause to livestock. He won on that: the judge accepted the flushing out was to prevent predation of lambs.

• Mr Wright had been given permission to do the flushing out by the landowner. The judge accepted he had that permission.
• The flushing out used only two hounds. The judge did accept that to be the case.
• The flushing out did not involve the use of a hound below ground. Again, the judge accepted that to be the case.
• Where Mr Wright came to grief was on the fifth, tightly drawn condition, that (a) reasonable steps were taken to ensure that as soon as possible after being flushed out, the fox was shot dead; and (b) each hound used in the flushing out was kept under sufficiently close control to ensure it did not prevent or obstruct the prompt shooting dead of the fox.The judge found that the length of time between flushing out and shooting could be up to 2-3min, which he said went far beyond “flushing”, and he said that after the fox is flushed, the hounds should be called off.The judge found that the only gun with the hunt that day was often as far as 1km or more from where hounds were searching.Moreover, there were occasions when Mr Wright and the marksman were out of sight of one another, so the fox could not be shot “as soon as possible” after being flushed. The judge also found, on the facts, that the hounds were not under tight control. The judge ended by doubting whether it could ever be possible, save in some limited areas of woodland or similar cover, to utilise the exemption from criminal liability with Foxhounds.Mr Wright, understandably, expressed himself very disappointed, and said he will appeal. His fine of £500 will strike many sympathetic to hunting as heavy, given that people who steal from shops are commonly fined far less for a first offence.On the other hand, he was ordered to pay only £250 costs in respect of a prosecution LACS said cost £65,000 and he did not suffer the confiscation of his equipment, hounds or hunting articles. So the judge certainly seems to have been fairly even-handed on sentence, even if his decision to convict was a tough one.

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

Exmoor huntsman Tony Wright has today been found guilty in Barnstaple Magistrates’ Court for breaching the terms of the Hunting Act. Tony Wright, 55, argued that he was attempting to comply with the conditions for ‘exempt hunting’. Mr Wright, who was fined £5000, will launch an appeal against his conviction.

The case was brought to court as a private prosecution by the League Against Cruel Sports at a cost of £65,000 after Avon and Somerset Police dismissed it based on the evidence available. During the week-long hearing Mr Wright denied breaching the Hunting Act when he led the Exmoor Foxhounds at Drybridge in Devon on 29 April, 2005. Despite evidence that he was trying to comply with the conditions for ‘exempt hunting’ (that he was accompanied by two hounds and a marksman to shoot the fox), the judge found Mr Wright guilty.

Simon Hart, Chief Executive of the Countryside Alliance, said: “No right minded person thinks that Tony Wright should have been branded a criminal.”

Over the course of the hearing the League told the court that Wright signalled to the Exmoor Foxhounds to pursue two foxes at Drybridge in Devon, thus breaking the terms of the Hunting Act.

The Countryside Alliance believe that today’s verdict brings the Hunting Act and ‘exempt hunting’ into question. “If people were confused about the Hunting Act before today they will be a lot more confused now,” said Mr Hart. “We believe that he [Mr Wright] was trying to comply with the law as he understood it and will be supporting his appeal. This is a piece of legislation which took seven years and 700 hours of parliamentary time to get onto the statute book yet still it is illogical and unclear.” According to the Countryside Alliance, Mr Wright does not know what else he could have done.

“There is a lot of analysis to be done,” said a Countryside Alliance spokesperson, “But one thing Mr Wright is clear about is that he is not stopping hunting.” Over the coming days the Countryside Alliance will be issuing hunts with new advice. “We have to find a way through this,” said the spokesperson. “This Hunting Act has got to go.”

To read a full analysis of the implications of this prosecution, including information on the appeal process and how hunts are responding to the news, pick up next week’s issue of Horse & Hound (August 10)

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 Private Prosecution of Tony Wright, huntsman of the Exmoor Foxhounds, got underway in Barnstaple Magistrates Court on Monday. Wright could face a fine of up to £5,000 if the prosecution is successful.

The League Against Cruel Sports has brought the case against the huntsman, claiming that on the 29 April 2005, just weeks after the Hunting Act came into force, he was “hounding foxes with dogs” at Drybridge, Devon.

Wright, who has hunted the Exmoor Foxhounds for the last 24 years, denies the charges. On the day in question, he says he was flushing a fox to a gun using two hounds, and insists that he did everything possible to ensure that the fox was shot as quickly as possible.

The League Against Cruel Sports, however, claims that Wright was “cynically” exploiting the exemption to get around the law while carrying on hunting.

The case, which was rejected by the police and Crown Prosecution Service as the evidence provided little chance of success, is considered by the hunting community to have been a publicity stunt.

A Countryside Alliance spokesperson said: “It’s hard to ignore the date on which the League issued a summons to Tony Wright [October 2005] – just days before hunting’s most media-friendly day – the first opening meets after the ban came into force.”

However, this is the first time that a huntsman is in court on charges under the Hunting Act, and the CA is adamant that whether the prosecution is successful or not, it will be significant, because it will provide a court’s interpretation of the Act.

“If Wright is found not guilty, then you have to accept that there have been 25,000 days of hunting, carried out by 300 hunts, since the law came into force, and there has not been a single successful prosecution of a hunt,” explains the CA. “If, on the other hand, he is found guilty, it is testament to how bad a law this is. Wright is confident that he was hunting within the law, and a guilty verdict would mean that there was no scope at all for any means of efficient and humane pest control within the new law.”

The trial is expected to last five days, with judgement likely to be reserved until a later date.

Foxes suffer more as a result of the ban

Recent research commissioned by the Middle Way Group has found that the Hunting Act 2004 has increased suffering in foxes. 68% of farmers use shotguns to control foxes, but of these, one quarter are wounded rather than being killed outright.

In addition, 44% of farmers across England and Wales report that stock losses have increased and that figure rises to 62% in Wales where the Hunting Act has made fox control near impossible in many areas. A third of farmers say that the cost of controlling foxes has risen as they have had to pay for a service traditionally supplied free by hunts.

Chair of the Middle Way Group, Lembit Opik said: “These findings confirm what the Middle Way Group said to Parliament in debates leading up to the Hunting Act – that welfare would be worsened by such an unprincipled approach. Now we have the firm proof that this is the case.”

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