NEW laws introducing further restrictions on hunting with dogs have been passed by Holyrood, with animal welfare campaigners hailing it as a “monumental day for Scotland”.
The Hunting with Dogs (Scotland) Bill was passed by 90 votes to 30 by the Scottish Parliament, with environment minister Mairi McAllan saying it would have an “immediate effect” by “modernising and strengthening” the existing legislation.
The changes will bring in a two-dog limit for all use of dogs in hunting, and will also ban trail hunting.
READ MORE: SNP use Commons 'prayer' tactic in bid to STOP Section 35 order
But the Bill will bring in a new licensing scheme, which will allow the use of more than two dogs in certain limited circumstance.
It comes more than two decades after Holyrood first passed legislation on hunting, which McAllan said had made Scotland “the first part of the UK to ban fox hunting”.
But she insisted the Wild Mammals Protection (Scotland) Act of 2002 had been “flawed” and did not “have the impact it was intended to”.
McAllan said: “There is no doubt there has been a clear cultural shift in our attitude towards wildlife over the last few decades.
“Practices such as hare coursing, fox hunting, badger baiting and dog fighting , which were once legal activities, and quite unbelievably considered to be spectator sports, they are no longer acceptable.”
The minister insisted: “The chasing and the killing of wild mammals with packs of dogs has no place in modern Scotland.”
And speaking about the new legislation, she added: “I firmly believe it will have an immediate effect by modernising and strengthening the legislation to assist enforcement authorities in dealing with those who would persist in illegal hunting.”
OneKind director Bob Elliot said: “This is a monumental day for Scotland. For 20 years the Scottish public have made it very clear that they want a real ban on the cruel ‘sport’ of foxhunting and now, after decades of tireless campaigning from ourselves and like-minded organisations and individuals, we finally have that ban.”
He added: “The chasing and killing of our beautiful foxes for ‘fun’ is unbelievably cruel and we are delighted that today the Scottish Government consigned this archaic ‘pastime’ to Scotland’s history books.
“Today we have a positive step towards wild animals finally obtaining the respect and basic protections that they deserve.”
Robbie Marsland, director of the League Against Cruel Sports Scotland, also welcomed the Bill, saying: “As of today, Scotland has the most robust law anywhere in the UK to prevent the cruelty of chasing and killing wild mammals for sport – and this is something to celebrate.
“Despite a persistent campaign from those resolute to keep hunting alive in the Scottish countryside, the Scottish Government has been determined to end the sport of hunting, a sentiment which has today been supported by the Parliament.
However, the Scottish Greens' rural affairs spokesperson Ariane Burgess said that the Hunting with Dogs Bill still retained a handful of potential “loopholes for the privileged few.”
But, despite it not going far enough, she also said that it still represented a major shift forward in protecting animal welfare.
Hailing the efforts of those campaigning for a real ban on fox hunting and other activities, she said their pressure continues to make a difference, and vowed to continue work on ending licensed hunts in particular.
Burgess said: "Hunting with dogs is a brutal and inhumane practice. It should have ended years ago. This Act may not go as far as we would have liked, but the changes represent a significant step forward in protecting animals from harm.
“It is thanks in no small part to the efforts of all those who have campaigned with us that we have reached this stage.
“The Scottish Greens will do everything we can to build on this and to end all blood sports in Scotland.
“In the debate I moved amendments to close the loopholes, which I fear will allow hunting with dogs to continue for the privileged few."
Meanwhile, Scottish Conservative rural economy spokeswoman Rachael Hamilton accused the government of having “ignored the views of experts”.
The Tory MSP said: “This Bill should really be able the balance between animal welfare and biodiversity. If there is no hunting with dogs, predators will be left to attack other animals.
“Those predators will, left unchecked, attack livestock, like lambs and sheep, or ground nesting birds like the curlew, the capercaillie or other vulnerable species.
“This is not a simple Bill that protect animal welfare. It is a Bill that protects some animals welfare at the expense of others.
She insisted it would be regarded as having “pinned the final nail in the coffin for many of Scotland’s endangered species”.
The Scottish Countryside Alliance branded the licensing process that will now come in for those wishing to use more than two dogs as being “both unjustified and unnecessary”.
READ MORE: Haggis to hit America for first time after 50-year ban under Macsween plan
The organisation’s director Jake Swindells however said: “The licensing scheme is, at least, an explicit acceptance by the Scottish Government that the use of packs of dogs in wildlife management is effective and necessary.
“It will now be down to NatureScot, the licensing body, to ensure that farmers and wildlife managers are able to access the best options for fox control in all circumstances.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel