Hunt saboteurs in Dorset claim that the British Transport Police is failing in its duty to prevent trespass by hunts because its officers are ignoring offences. One local protestor said "They are effectively being paid to go out and support the hunt". The Cattistock Hunt has also been lambasted for putting lives at risk through its irresponsible behaviour.
On 7 February 2004, two British Transport Police officers were spotted observing the Cattistock hunt in Dorset who were in the vicinity of the Weymouth-Yeovil train line. While the hunt were a safe distance from the train lines at 3 p.m., the officers were cosying up in their vehicle watching the hunt search for foxes in a valley. Half an hour later, when hounds trespassed on the train line at Chantmarle, shortly before a train passed through, the officers were nowhere to be seen.
At approximately 3:35 p.m. hounds were spotted below a railway bridge and photographed by 2 saboteurs. Whilst trying to take the photos one of the saboteurs was allegedly reversed into by the hunt terrierman's Landover and received bruising, whilst another was threatened by a supporter of the hunt. Hounds were still on the track, half a mile on from the bridge at 3:37 p.m. as protestors with video cameras arrived. A train passed through at 3:39 p.m. By this point hounds had been recovered from the track by the whipper-in and terrierman for the hunt.
When anti-hunt protestors caught up with the officers and made a complaint, they claim they were told that the trespass "doesn't matter".
The Cattistock Hunt put at risk the lives of its hounds and its staff as well as the driver and passengers on the train. Their arrogance shows their contempt for other people's rights and the law. The failure of British Transport Police to prosecute hunts when they trespass on rail lines could explain why hunt trespass on rail lines happens regularly each hunting season. We are just grateful that no hounds died in this incident.
The previous night a local protestor had been phoned by a senior representative of British Transport Police and told that they would not tolerate trespass from either the hunt or saboteurs and that officers are only there to ensure that there is "nothing on the line at all". The call followed a previous complaint about the conduct of the local officers who had been following the hunt and failed to act when the hunt trespassed a few weeks previously.
The local officers have also recently acted out of their jurisdiction when they cautioned a hunt saboteur over an incident that had no connection with the railway. Local protestors claim that this shows an affinity with the hunt and could explain the reluctance to prosecute them. According to the Rail, Maritime and Transport Union, "British Transport Police can only investigate crime on or in connection with railway property or railway affairs."
In an article published by the Western Gazette, Simon Lubin of British Transport Police also went so far as to make a false claim that he admitted he could not substantiate: "We have had problems with hunt saboteurs in the past who have led hounds across the lines - not that we have been able to prove it." So, Mr Lubin, if you can't prove it why are you saying it unless you are pro-hunt and trying to dirty the reputation of hunt saboteurs? Making unfounded allegations sounds like bias to us.
Interestingly, Tessa Jackson, master of the Cattistock Hunt, said "There was no problem at all. No person or horse is allowed to cross the line. We know that and we did no wrong." So, as long as you technically don't break the law, it's OK to put at risk the lives of passengers and train drivers by allowing your hounds to stray onto the line. To claim that they did "no wrong" in putting their hounds' lives at risks is yet another example of how hunting animals can be victims as much as the wildlife that is chased, and how they are viewed as indispensable. It must not be forgotten that thousands of perfectly healthy hounds are shot every year because they are not able to provide a suitable level of enjoyment for hunting folk. People should not be trusted with the care of a pack of animals if they are going to be so reckless with their safety.
Tessa is also wife of the Director of the Master of Fox Hounds Association, Alastair Jackson. The MFHA is the "regulatory body" for fox hunting - the rot goes all the way to the top and the Cattistock are typical of hunts in their attitude towards hounds.
|
|
 |
return to HSA homepage |  Extended Comment Index |