Evidence that hunts are bypassing Scotland's new anti-hunting laws
NatureScot issued 31 licences in six month period
Scotland's Hunting with Dogs Act came into effect in October 2023. The new legislation replaced the previous Protection of Wild Mammals Act 2002 and was intended to close loopholes which hunts had exploited since its inception. However, there is mounting evidence that Scottish hunts have found loopholes to exploit in the new legislation as well.
On 23 August, the Daily Record reported on concerns from League Against Cruel Sports Scotland that hunts are exploiting the licencing system introduced by the Hunting with Dogs Act. It reported that NatureScot (the department of the Scottish government that deals with almost all species licensing in Scotland) had issued over 40 licences under the new law between November 2023 and April 2024. In 31 of these licences, the use of more than 20 dogs was permitted.
Under the Hunting with Dogs Act, it is illegal to hunt wild mammals with more than two dogs. However, the government implemented licensable exceptions including foxes killing farmed animals or "no other solution" available for fox control.
It is unclear what exceptions were considered adequate for the 31 licences issued during the last hunting season. However, the Daily Record said it had seen communication between NatureScot and the League Against Cruel Sport Scotland revealing the environment agency had issued four of them to a dog handler "known to work for the Lauderdale Hunt". Furthermore, it admitted that it "cannot be sure" if it had issued licences to other hunts in the country because they were given to named individuals rather than hunts as a whole.
Of the 31 licences issued for 20 or more dogs, NatureScot said it monitored just two for compliance. The Daily Record said that:
"It also defended the compliance monitoring as “proportionate and robust” - saying only four dog handlers had been named across all the licences issued, and two of these had been monitored."
The Record also quoted a NatureScot spokeswoman saying that
“All licences we have issued have been for the prevention of serious damage to livestock…We are committed to having appropriate, proportionate, and robust compliance monitoring in place for this licensed activity.”
Protect the Wild’s Rob Pownall said
"Scotland's Hunting with Dogs Act was a step in the right direction, but the loopholes being exploited by hunts show that it falls short of its intended purpose. The fact that over 40 licenses were issued in such a short time, with some allowing the use of more than 20 dogs, is alarming. It's clear that without stricter enforcement and tighter legislation, these so-called protections for wildlife are little more than a facade. Protect the Wild stands firm in calling for changes that will truly end hunting with hounds, not just in Scotland, but across the UK."
Still killing foxes
These licences aren't the only suggestion that Scotland's hunts have continued as usual despite the new law. As Protect the Wild previously reported, Police Scotland charged huntsman for the Jed Forest Hunt, Matthew Wilkinson, under the Hunting with Dogs Act in April. It came after the League Against Cruel Sports Scotland covertly filmed the Jed Forest Hunt throughout the 2023/24 hunting season.
Furthermore, Scottish hunt saboteur groups have repeatedly flagged up transgressions by Jed Forest Hunt since the new law came into effect. Scottish Borders Hunt Sabs, Glasgow Hunt Sabs and Edinburgh Hunt Sabs all visited the hunt throughout the season and captured evidence that it continued chasing and killing foxes as well as other problems such as traffic offences typically associated with illegal hunting. On Boxing Day 2023, the sab groups reported that the Jed Forest Hunt shot and killed a fox while hounds surrounded them.
Meanwhile, on 28 January, Glasgow Hunt Sabs said it found the Buccleuch Hunt using a full pack of hounds. When questioned, it reported that the hunt claimed it was trail hunting - despite the Hunting with Dogs Act explicitly outlawing trail hunting. It's unclear whether the Buccleuch Hunt was one of the recipients of the 31 licences issued by NatureScot.
All too predictable
Concerns were raised from the outset about Scotland's licensing system. Mercedes Villalba, Labour MSP, said during a discussion of the then-proposed law in October 2022 that:
"Although the bill will strengthen fox-hunting laws, it will also introduce a licensing scheme that will allow hunting to continue in some circumstances. Under the proposed scheme, packs of dogs could still be used. As a result, such packs would be exempt from the proposed two-dog limit. That is evidently a loophole that could be exploited by people looking to get around the rules and continue with hunts."
And Colin Smyth, Labour and Co-operative MSP, echoed similar concerns during the same debate:
"There are numerous ways in which people can manage wildlife in their area, and using dogs is only one of them. The very fact that the Government has so far failed to define what would be achieved by a licence and what the criteria would be suggests that licensing will be difficult. I think Fergus Ewing gives the game away that some people will seek to ride roughshod over the ban by using the licensing scheme for pretty undefined criteria."
Furthermore, as the Independent covered in January, opportunities to exploit the licensing system were evident to the public as well:
"However, one hunting opponent, using the Twitter handle @Acruelpastime, said the new licensing scheme was “unnecessary and open to exploitation”. “The new licensing scheme is another glaring loophole. Farmers do not need to protect their ‘livestock’ from foxes by chasing them with packs of dogs.”
As a result, the Scottish government cannot claim that these loopholes weren't foreseen. Therefore it is incumbent on it to rectify the problem and introduce amendments that will prevent hunting with hounds from continuing at all.
What the Scottish experience highlights is that the hunting industry will seep into every tiny gap available. That's why it is essential any law meant to end hunting are absolutely watertight to prevent hunting with hounds. This is as true for England and Wales (and Northern Ireland) as it is for Scotland. That's why Protect the Wild has proposed the Hunting of Mammals Bill. Read more about it here.
Our founder Rob is set to run the Richmond marathon in mid-September to raise funds for Protect the Wild! Now is a great time to donate to the fundraiser because a very generous donor has said they will match all donations up to £20,000! So every donation has double the impact! £5 ends up being £10 and £10 ends up being £20! If you’d like to show Rob your support and help us raise vital funds to support the work that we do you can donate here.
This is very worrying and upsetting news. I had really hoped that when Scotland "banned hunting with more than 2 dogs" (mind you, that is probably a loophole in itself as "hunting with ANY dogs" should have been the words used instead of allowing even 2 dogs), that that would have truly been the end of barbaric hunting in Scotland, where the foxes, deers, rabbits etc were all safer and all those sick hunts had packed up for good 😿💔🤬🤬!! All those loopholes in Scotland's act as well as England's and Wale's act, including sham trail hunting, need to be properly closed once and for all and strongly enforced until ALL those barbaric hunts have folded for good!! RIP that poor fox who was barbarically shot and murdered by those sadistic monsters 🦊❤️😿💔. Once again and as always though, "My hats off" to the brilliant sabs everywhere for all that you have done and are doing 👍!!
Not the first article I've read about corruption in Scottish government concerning wildlife and nature. I can't remember now but I think it was over protecting lynx or wildcats about 5 years ago. If it's anything like Wales their councils and government departments are full of unionists who bully the life out of anyone employed there who tries to be a decent person and do things by moral guidance. Believe me I know because it happened to me. Then they complain because they have to spend ridiculous sums of tax payer money on agency staff and covering staff sickness.