Have the hunters outfoxed the law?

NICK Walker weaves his way across the South Durham countryside leaving behind a familiar scent for the hounds to follow. Forty riders, a handful in scarlet jackets, sit astride their imposing hunters, taking a nip from their flasks and chatting as the hounds speak excitedly. Runner Nick has a 30-minute start before the chase begins.

This was the scene at the first meet of the South Durham Hunt in Tony Blair's backyard of Sedgefield - as the media is fond of saying - after the Hunting Act came into force a year ago, on February 18.

Before the ban, there had been talk of huge numbers of jobs being lost - around 9,000 were directly or indirectly at risk according to findings of the inquiry by Lord Burns - under a law which would bring to its knees a centuries-old way of life.

The Bill was passed on November 18, 2004 after ping-ponging back and forth between the House of Commons and the Lords. In the end, Commons Speaker Michael Martin invoked the Parliament Act which pushed the Bill through.

At that first meet after the ban was imposed, Mark Shotton, 60, master of the South Durham Hunt, warned of an "uncertain future". "We'll try to keep going," he said.

But 12 months later few jobs have been lost nationally; most of the 200 or so hunts are still functioning; no-one has been prosecuted and 40 per cent are enjoying their biggest membership increases for years.

The South Durham is among them. It has seen its membership increase by 50 per cent. "It has kind of backfired," says Mr Shotton, of the ban. "There's a lot of young people now turning up to see what it's about. The law has given it a new momentum and it looks like it will go from strength to strength because more and more people want to come and try it."

In the days after the ban came into force, more than 200 hunts rode out across the country leaving 91 foxes dead - some shot legally after two hounds had chased them out of covert, others killed accidentally.

Many hunts adapted to drag-hunting, which involves soaking a rag with a scent and dragging it behind a horse. But the fear was that followers who loved the thrill of the chase would soon grow bored with drag hunts.

By the time the new season began last autumn, it emerged that there were other ways to keep within the law - according to the hunts - and still enjoy the chase. In October last year, the Countryside Alliance said that about 50 hunts had bought birds of prey - chiefly golden eagles or eagle owls - or were paying falconers to go out with them. By doing so they exploited a loophole in the law because the Act allows an unlimited number of dogs to flush out a wild animal from covert so a bird of prey can chase it.

The South Durham Hunt - established about 200 years ago - bought a Tasmanian eagle owl called Bobo. But it, like other hunts, faced criticism from the League Against Cruel Sports for failing to release the bird once the hounds had flushed out the fox. Failing to release the bird is an accusation Mr Shotton denies.

"You have to be careful when you let it go," he says. "But we release it every time we go out. I would think it has killed about two to three foxes out of about ten or 20 times we went out."

Like many, the South Durham hunt rides out with a pack of hounds and follows a trail. What incenses the anti-hunt lobby is how many foxes are 'accidentally' killed by hounds who pick up their scent along the way. But, as Mr Shotton points out, what can you do if the hounds pick up the scent of a real fox?

"Under the new law you have got to try and stop them but how can you?" he says. "The problem you are going to have in future is that you're going to get intensive packs of them (foxes) and when people go and lay the trail there are going to be so many foxes it's going to be chaos.

"We have no intention of trying to do it illegally, we're trying to do it legally. We're trying to do it and keep it within the law but the law is so twisted you don't know whether you're coming or going.

"At the end of the day the fox is still to get rid of. Under the new system, if you put two dogs in to flush it out you can end up shooting every animal that comes out - everything gets shot."

The use of birds of prey has certainly incensed the League Against Cruel Sports and the Hawk Board, which, up until hunts began using birds of prey, had previously supported the Countryside Alliance's campaign to defend the right to carry on hunting.

"We have anecdotal evidence that a lot of birds have been killed because, if you think about it, a pack of hounds and a bird of prey are both going after the same prey," says Wanda Wyporska, a spokeswoman for the league.

"You can use a pack of dogs to flush out the fox but that means as soon as the fox pops out you have to call off the hounds. If you don't that's illegal. If you've got a bird of prey that's tracking a fox that's illegal as it is if you don't actually release the bird."

It appears that until a test case is brought the hunts will continue to enjoy their increased membership. But a court date may not be long in coming. Although the police appear not to be actively pursuing hunts, the anti-hunting lobby is there, gathering what it believes is solid evidence. The League Against Cruel Sports has hunt monitors and a hunt crime watch line people can phone.

"A lot of people out in the countryside don't want to see hunting," says Ms Wyporska. "We are working very closely with ACPO (the Association of Chief Police Officers) and local police officers and as the officers become more confident and learn more about it I think we'll undoubtedly see more prosecutions. The South Durham hunt is going to be under investigation and we're going to be looking at them very carefully."

Durham Police said yesterday it had yet to receive any complaints regarding the hunting ban. Across the country, a number of complaints have been made, however, and files are with the Crime Prosecution Service, including two cases in Dorset, one in Gloucestershire and two in Avon and Somerset.

Hunts may also face a new threat - the Anti-Social Behaviour Order. Not just created for yobs in "hoodies", the Cotswold Hunt is facing the prospect of an Asbo sought by villagers after the hunt allegedly trampled across private land and left a trail of destruction.

Still, despite the loopholes in the law, the League Against Cruel Sports believes the ban is workable.

"Basically, it's a great cause for celebration that we have the Hunting Act on the statute books," says Ms Wyporska. "It's a very clear law. Nobody expected hunting to end overnight."

The ban took seven years and over 700 hours of Parliamentary time to reach the statute book. There were those who thought it would signal the last tally-ho, the end of a British tradition stretching back centuries, but 12 months later the hunt buttons are still being polished, the hounds are still in the kennels.

Nor is the fight on behalf of the hunting fraternity over. The Countryside Alliance is still awaiting the outcome of its appeal in the challenge to the Hunting Act under European Human Rights legislation.

Until then, the law will remain to many hunts "unworkable and riddled with inconsistencies" - and Mr Shotton would certainly like to meet Tony Blair if their paths ever cross in Sedgefield to tell him so. "I'd love to tell him what a cock-up he made of it," he says. "I don't think he wanted a ban, I think they knew it was unworkable."