More on the Hunting Conviction in England

I bogged here recently on the conviction of a huntsman in England. Patrick, the Terrierman, had a lot to say, both in his blog (scroll down past the plug for Matt to "a slightly troubling note") and in person. He wrote to me:

"The professional houndsmen, kennel men and terriermen are a breed apart, and quite smart and sensible as a general rule (even if they are poor and not always too well educated). The problem is that they are just two or three people in a field of 300 riders with a lot of money, power and ignorance throwing its weight about. They are pressured on all sides and trapped in the trough of history,

"On a larger scale, I have to tell you the British are idiots when it comes to game management and hunting. There is no getting around it. The British love canned hunts, putting out as many as 300 or 400 birds an acre for glorified chicken shoots. They regulate guns as if everyone is a member of the Manson Family, but have no bag limits for most small game and no season for it either. Tresspass laws are almost unheard of. They ban modern leghold traps for nuisance fox, but snares are OK, as is lamping fox over bait at night. It's OK to course rabbits and fox with greyhounds, but not hares. It's anyone's guess how the dog is supposed to know which is which.

(Snip)

"The police would not prosecute Wright, and so Wright is being prosecuted under an old "qui tam" law. A reverse of this conviction is pretty likely, I think. Even if it is not reversed, however, the fine is pretty insignificant and the Hunt will probably pay for it. If the conviction stands, this will be the first after more than two years of very active hunting. In truth this is the kind of law that undermines the rule of law and for that reason alone it is a threat to democracy. if government can do something this stupid, there's no telling what's next!

"The problem in the UK, of course, is that they did not have people like Teddy Roosevelt and Aldo Leopold to shape their ethos and institutions. We have some historically bent game laws in the U.S. of course (parts of the the Migratory Bird Treaty Act do not make too much sense in the 21st Century), but we are bastions of common sense and wisdom compared to the British.

"God Bless America, land that I love. I would not want to be British".

To some extent, it's coming here. Albuquerque now has the most restrictive animal laws in the nation.

But maybe not right away-- see also Patrick's comments here on comparative geography.