“...before anyone starts, when I say 2 hounds are permitted to hunt the animal of course that means to hunt it in the direction of guns or birds of prey.”

“As I understand it two hounds are permitted to actually hunt the animal. However any amount of hounds can be used to generally search for the animal as long as they don't go on to hunt it. If they mark to ground, i.e. if they find the fox or whatever in a hole, then the hounds must be drawn off and, if the hole is within a certain distance of game bird rearing pens, then terriers can be used to locate it and it must then be shot with a humane killer - the rules may be slightly different in the case of mink which prey on fisheries. As I understand it the animal must be drawn into a trap then shot as soon as possible. The hounds drawing the river were therefore within the law if they were being used to find the mink in its lair. Perhaps someone with more specific knowledge (as opposed to outraged opinioni) can comment?”

“So Mr Bradshaw who claims to know so much about the Hunting Act has been claiming for several years in the letter pages of the Express that he his breaking the law by using his four dogs to flush out deer and refusing to shoot them now admits what he has been told so many times that actually he is not and there are no restrictions on the number of dogs or requirement to shoot the deer!!!

HURRAH!

So Mr Bradshaw what exactly is your problem with the law?

You can still toddle off down to the woods and have a jolly with the deer after all!

http://www.thisisexeter.co.uk/letters/Flushed-animal-need-killed/article-1480264-detail/article.html”

“ps there have been no prosecutions involving the use of more than two dogs in order to flush deer out of cover for dispersal as I do.

That's because it is not illegal.”

“@The Invigilator I absoutely agree with you. Irrespective of the law the use of more than two dogs to flush out deer is a harmless activity and there is no public interest to prosecute.

For that very reason I am giving my local hunt permission to do exactly that with the hounds.

The conditions in the law for the legality of flushing out are basically garbage and introduced by incompetent politicians.

Specifically anybody who seriously thinks that the requirement to shoot the deer as soon as possible after they are flushed is a fool.

The use of more than two dogs to flush out and chase wild deer is a fun and wholesome activity and it can also form part of a welfare friendly non lethal wildlife management strategy.

The simple fact is that anyone can do this. All they have to do is first notify the police RSPCA &c of their intended activities and they will find they can enjoy the experience of taking a stag through a wood with hounds snapping at its heels.

ps it isn't a hole in the law. The law is against hunting not flushing out”

“Oh, clever Mr Bradshaw, thinking that he's spotted a hole in the kaw, It is completely workable and he knows this (there have been over 100 successful prosecutions). Any decision to prosecute would be made by the CPS. He knows this also. Who is interested in Giles' harmless activites other than himself? It would not be in the public interest to prosecute. I fear it would only be interesting to Giles himself. Correspondence closed unless GB has a valid point to make. (The Invigilator rests his case.)”

“P Brown is out of date. Defra used to insist that no more than two dogs can be used to flush out wild mammals however the prevailing view has changed.

The RSPCA on their political animal website now advise that the use of more than two dogs to flush out wild mammals is 'unlikely' to be an offence.

http://www.politicalanimal.org.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=29

I've been openly doing this for five years with the full knowledge of LACS the RSPCA and the police it is inconceivable that these organisations would turn a blind eye to this if it were illegal.”

“@The Invigilator

Who is exactly then? I have continued using more than two dogs to flush wild red deer out of cover in my woods for the last 5 years.

I have told the police, the RSPCA and LACS.

Are you seriously suggesting that if this was illegal then these organisations would just stand aside and allow me to openly flout the law?

Surely not!

If the RSPCA say that what I do is fine then that is fine with me.”

“The law is the law. Use of more than two dogs infringes it. Fortunately government departments are not reponsible for enforcing the law! Neither is the RSPCA, which organisation has remarkably limited involvement with the Hunting Act.”

“P Brown is out of date. Defra used to insist that no more than two dogs can be used to flush out wild mammals however the prevailing view has changed.

The RSPCA on their political animal website now advise that the use of more than two dogs to flush out wild mammals is 'unlikely' to be an offence.

http://www.politicalanimal.org.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=29”