RURAL affairs minister Alun Michael explains the Hunting Act, and says the decision was democratic and should be accepted by hunt supporters THIS week we are publishing guidance on the content and effect of the Hunting Act. The act comes into force on February 18, 2005, and bans the use of dogs to hunt wild mammals, such as foxes, deer and hares. It also bans all hare coursing. The issue of hunting has been the subject of contentious debate, inside and outside Parliament, for many years. There are strong feelings on all sides. No one could have tried harder than I did - for three years - to persuade hunt supporters and opponents to find common ground. In that endeavour the prime minister backed me to the end. But the hunters did not want to allow the slightest compromise on their pastime and those opposed to the sport said that only a complete ban would resolve the issue of cruelty to animals. The debate is now over. A decision has been reached democratically and - as with any other issue - we must all obey the law, whether we agree with it or not. Those who think the law is invalid or unjust have every right to challenge it in the courts or to make their feelings known through the ballot box in the next general election. They should be realistic, though. The Parliament Acts were invoked automatically and properly, under the procedures they establish - not by the government - to prevent the unelected House of Lords persistently thwarting the wishes of the elected house. The Parliament Acts were previously used to enact acts concerning war crimes, European elections and the homosexual age of consent. Opinion polls - although their exact results vary, as do the questions asked by pollsters - have consistently shown that more people oppose hunting than support it, although the vast majority do not feel strongly either way. Most people - like the government - are more concerned about schools, affordable housing, hospitals and transport. Perhaps that is why our political opponents are so keen to try to focus attention on the hunting sideshow. Whatever the views of those who support hunting there is no excuse for breaking the law. Seeking to deny electricity or water supply to their neighbours by refusing utility companies access to their land to carry out repairs; preventing our soldiers from training on their land; or violent and threatening behaviour towards MPs or the police are all unacceptable activities. All of these tactics have been used or threatened by hunt supporting landowners. No-one can choose which laws to obey and which to ignore: that would be anarchy, not democracy. The intention behind the Act is to prevent cruelty - that is unnecessary suffering - to wild mammals. Even the Countryside Alliance accepted that the central issue in the debate was cruelty, and its chairman said repeatedly that "if it's cruel we should not be doing it". The issue is now wider than animal welfare. It is now about democracy and the rule of law. Hunt supporters were even prepared to jeopardise the future accessibility of MPs to their constituents by breaking into the House of Commons. The Act is simple to understand, obey and enforce, despite some imaginative attempts by hunt supporters to conjure up scenarios to break both its spirit and letter. As with any piece of legislation, there will be no shortage of lawyers willing to offer contradictory interpretations of it but I don't believe that the police or courts will be fooled. They are not stupid, though it seems some hunt supporters - and some sections of the media - think otherwise. So, deliberately setting your dog(s) on a deer, fox or hare, for whatever reason, will be illegal from February 18. There are some tightly-drawn exemptions to the Act, which allow hunting activities to take place in limited circumstances and with the consent of the occupier of the land. Ratting and rabbiting are allowed. So is stalking and flushing out with up to two dogs, subject to strict conditions to ensure animal welfare. Anyone who is found guilty of an offence under the Act faces a fine of up to £5,000, and could have their dogs, vehicles or any articles they use for hunting confiscated. Anyone who is convicted could find it hard to get a firearms licence as well as facing other difficulties in relation to employment or insurance as a result of conviction. Large numbers of people will not find themselves out of work as a result of the Act. But the ban could have a direct effect on some people's jobs and it is important that they know about the help that is available. Hunts will be able to divert into other activities, such as drag hunting and other forms of riding. Or collecting and disposing of dead and dying animals, as some hunts currently do, as a business service for farmers and landowners. And there are openings in the horse industry for farriers, saddlers and hoteliers who currently provide services to hunts. Defra is working with horse industry representatives to find ways to expand opportunities. It will not be necessary to destroy horses or dogs as result of the Act. The RSPCA has already offered to help with the re-homing of dogs, based on its considerable experience over many years with a wide range of breeds of dog. Defra is working with the RSPCA and with other animal welfare bodies on this issue. Of course farmers and landowners need to be able to prevent the serious damage that some animals do to livestock and crops. The Act does not prevent anyone from using dogs to control rats and rabbits or from carrying out other legal and humane forms of pest control. Defra's Rural Development Service is publishing a range of leaflets covering the recommended ways of preventing the serious damage that can be caused by foxes, mink and hares. There was no win-win solution to the hunting problem. Those who passionately believe in their right to do as they please on their own land were never going to reach a workable and lasting accord with those who believe, equally passionately, that human beings should not inflict unnecessary suffering on animals for sport or entertainment. Come on, you who support hunting - recognize that your voice has been listened to but that a democratic decision has been taken. It is now for "law abiding people" to obey the law. | 
