Terrier Work – Hunting’s ‘Soft Underbelly’ Exposed Yet Again

Ex-Essex & Suffolk huntsman, Sam Staniland. was in court last Monday facing six animal welfare charges relating to terrier work.

The court heard how Staniland, who already has a conviction under the Hunting Act from his time at the Meynell & South Staffs, failed to prevent injuries and suffering to multiple terriers, a foxhound, and two lurchers by causing, and failing to prevent, dogs from fighting with foxes and badgers.

The court also heard how he failed to provide appropriate veterinary care for injured dogs. One suffered missing teeth, another developed infections in their muzzle and nose from fighting injuries that were not treated.

The terriers, along with Staniland’s phone, were seized in police raids carried out in January as part of an RSPCA investigation into hunt terrier work. Six men were arrested after police raided hunt kennels and huntsman’s houses seizing 22 dogs altogether.

Staniland’s Defence team are now applying for a warrant to drag these mistreated dogs back from their new homes so they can be provided as evidence for a Defence vet to examine, despite the fact that they have already been examined by an expert vet. Ms Stevens of the Prosecution said it would be unacceptable to expect the new owners to submit dogs as evidence, and so much time has passed it would be pointless.

One defence witness, Gillie Cranfield, a master of the Essex & Suffolk Hunt, has had press attention before; having to apologise last year when hounds chased a fox into stables at a meet she was responsible for. They distressed a pregnant horse, and caused a nine month old foal to flee, as well as breaking fencing.

These cases of alleged harm and neglect to dogs in Staniland’s care are damning enough, but it is disappointing there is not also mention of the targeted harm and suffering he has caused to wild animals through his work as huntsman at the Essex & Suffolk, and when he was at the Meynell & South Staffs. He pleaded not guilty, his defences being: he was not there, he had too many dogs under his control and some wandered off, or events were already happening when he arrived.

This case shows the true reality of hunting that the British Hound Sports Association are trying to hide; hunting’s soft underbelly. The BHSA (hunting’s governing body) have discouraged their hunts from employing terriermen, publishing advice that, “Terrier work must only be undertaken if specifically asked for by the farmer or landowner”.

Mark Hankinson, then director of the Master of Foxhounds Association, in the leaked Hunting Office webinars struggled to justify terriermen’s work, saying, “Terrier work, this is our soft underbelly. A lot of people would say that if you’re going trail hunting why do you need terriermen following you around?” However six counts of animal cruelty from just one of six men arrested in RSPCA raids on hunt kennels and suggests the extent to which animal cruelty is ingrained within hunting.

The BHSA are trying to convince the British public that trail hunting is real, while their hunt staff are repeatedly on trial for harming and neglecting the dogs they are supposed to care for. These institutional lies from the BHSA, and national coverup of the reality of hunting are wearing thin as cases like Staniland’s crop up again and again. It’s clear the hunting world is desperate to sanitise their image in the run up to the General Election, but the truth is showing through the cracks..

The role of a terrierman in a hunt is traditionally to make sure of a good day’s hunting; lots of foxes, and good ‘sport’. This would involve ‘bolting’ foxes if they ‘went to ground’ using a terrier to flush the fox out. They are also responsible for blocking badger setts to stop a fox from seeking refuge there. A fox will usually run from a terrier unless cornered, whereas a badger will attack to defend themself. Badger setts are now protected by law, and using terriers to flush a fox out to a pack of hounds has not been legal since the 2004 Hunting Act. It seems that almost 20 years after the Hunting Act came in, hunt staff are still seen on trial for using terriers to hunt foxes.

This case also shows the inadequacy of the Hunting Act, as Staniland has repeatedly used terriers to fight and bolt foxes, however the charges brought against him are all under animal welfare laws, and relate to dogs in his care, rather than the clear intention of hunting foxes.

Staniland is far from being an isolated case. Last week former Old Berkshire Huntsman Oliver Thompson was given a suspended 20-week prison sentence, having pleaded guilty to two separate Section 4 Animal Welfare Act charges, admitting to using a fox to train one of his terriers.

In August this year at Wrexham Magistrates Court the ex-Wynnstay huntsman Christopher Woodward pleaded guilty to interfering with a badger sett contrary to the Protection of Badgers Act 1992, then in October Stuart Radbourne, Huntsman and Master of the now disbarred Avon Vale Hunt, pleaded guilty to causing unnecessary suffering to a protected animal. He admitted to throwing a fox to a pack of hounds and was charged under Section 4(1) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

These cases show we need a stronger Hunting Act which is fit for purpose – join our General Election campaign here.