From: RustyBullethole, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Times "Opinion" 14.9.00
Walking my dogs will turn me into a criminal
Magnus Linklater
I have not, until recently, been a dog owner. As a
family, we have been mainly urban dwellers, so cats are
more our thing. Now, however, owing to circumstances beyond
my control, I find myself responsible for three unruly
setters. They belonged to my father-in-law who, after more
than 50 years, has handed on his hill-farm in Perthshire,
which includes, among other things, this trio of delightful
but definitely batty hounds.
Setters are notoriously demented creatures. It may be
something to do with their breeding, or it may be because
the job for which they were trained: freezing into rigid
immobility the moment they scent a game-bird imposes a
severe strain on the nervous system. Whatever the reason,
most of them, in my opinion, are in need of counselling.
They are, on the other hand, the best company in the
world. Taking my three new friends for a walk is a hugely
enjoyable, if unpredictable, experience. Holly, the eldest,
is a red and white setter, now almost wholly deaf, unable
to see beyond ten paces, whose hind legs are not quite
what they were, and who shows distinct signs of early
senility. She is, however, indefatigable, and will run,
though not always in the right direction, until she drops.
Bracken is a beautiful red setter, who lopes through the
heather with practised ease, but who barks with manic
persistence if you slow down or stop. His ideal would be
to belong to a marathon runner. Jennie, the youngest, is
also red and white, and is almost normal, except that she
suffers from anxiety symptoms which cause her to jump up
and paw the nearest human being, usually just after taking
a mud bath in the closest ditch.
I took these three creatures for a long walk on a
heather-clad hill last weekend. They chased rabbits,
hares, and even spotted the occasional grouse. We all
came back the better for it. From next spring, what we
did will be illegal. If the anti-hunting Bill, as
currently drafted, is voted through the Scottish
Parliament and becomes law, anyone taking more than one
dog for a walk with the intention of hunting, commits
an offence.
Whether Holly, Bracken and Jennie went out with
such an intention is not entirely clear. I rather fear
they did - that, after all, is what they were bred for.
The Protection of Wild Mammals (Scotland) Bill, which
is being sponsored by Lord Watson of Invergowrie and is
the first Private Member's Bill to come before the
Scottish Parliament, would almost certainly ensure my
prosecution as their owner.
On Tuesday week the Bill will be considered by
the Rural Affairs Committee which has the right to
reject it as incompetent. So far, the committee has
received more than 3,000 written submissions, the
majority of which are hostile - perhaps 60-40
against. That is not surprising. It a crude and ineptly
drafted Bill - even Lord Watson admits that, and he has
indicated that he wishes to introduce amendments which
may be considered at stage two.
So far, however, all we have to go on is the Bill
itself, as drafted. As such it is a massive intrusion
into civil liberties, giving police the power to stop
and search, to raid farmhouses, seize vehicles, and
require country people to produce licences for taking
more than one dog out for a walk. From its very first
sentence, "A person must not hunt a wild mammal with a
dog", it presumes guilt rather than innocence,
criminalising anyone who sets out with a gun under his
arm and more than one dog in pursuit of rabbits, hares
or foxes.
Having stated this one all-embracing proposition,
it goes on to define the narrow circumstances in which
hunting may be permitted. A single dog, for instance,
may be used, but only if it is "under close control".
The dog may hunt to "protect livestock . . . or crops"
or to provide food, but "not by way of sale or trade",
and certainly not for the fun of it. Even taking one
dog out to hunt will require a licence "granted by
Scottish Ministers", which has to be renewed annually.
This will be given only if the applicant can demonstrate
that he needs the dog to control "the number of a
particular species in a particular place in order to
safeguard the welfare of that species . . ."
This is mind-boggling stuff, bureaucracy gone
mad. It means that anyone who takes more than one dog
for a walk in the country is automatically an object
of suspicion. It makes a nonsensical distinction
between a dog that puts up a rabbit above ground and
one that chases it down a hole - anyone with a terrier
will recognise the problem. It will mean the end, not
just of traditional hunts, of which Scotland has very
few compared with England, but the dog packs which
are used to help farmers and landowners to control
foxes.
Lord Watson now says that he has no intention
of banning those who take dogs for a walk "on the
heath or in the park", and he is going to withdraw
the idea of licences. He also intends to exclude
rough shooting and falconry from his provisions,
though why it should be permissible to train a hawk
to kill and devour a mammal, but not for a pack of
dogs, is not explained.
But then anomalies are part and parcel of the
legislation. It is divisive, damaging, and will cause
massive resentment in the countryside. The committee
would be well-advised to throw it out lock, stock
and barrel. If it does not, the Bill will go before
the full Parliament which is likely to favour it,
and thus become law, sometime next spring - well in
advance of English legislation.
What it will do to country life I cannot
imagine. As for Holly, Bracken and Jennie, I suspect
that they may well have a collective nervous breakdown.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org
List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___________________________________________________________
T O P I C A The Email You Want. http://www.topica.com/t/16
Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
