Dáil debates

Thursday, 24 June 2010

Wildlife (Amendment) Bill 2010: Second Stage

 

3:00 pm

Photo of Mary WallaceMary Wallace (Meath East, Fianna Fail)

As I have outlined today, County Meath plays a significant role in hunting and horse racing in Ireland. This ban will have repercussions for more than the Ward Union Hunt and its 200 members.

The proponents of this Bill have cited animal welfare and public safety as being the driving force behind the bill. I simply do not agree that this Bill is needed for animal welfare and public safety reasons. I have been to visit the kennels, as has the Acting Chairman, Deputy Johnny Brady. I might elaborate on that if I have time.

Stag hunting involves the separation of a deer from the herd and its transportation to a location from where it is released and hunted. It was devised 200 years ago to allow hunts to take place when wild deer became too scarce. Red deer are bred and maintained for this purpose by the Ward Union Hunt. Let us be clear on what actually happens. On a hunting day a stag is released, recaptured and returned safe and sound to the Ward Union Hunt farm. Each stag in the herd is hunted just once a year, with constant supervision by wildlife officers and veterinarians from the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. This is a fact. The health of the stag is checked before and after a hunt and continual monitoring has shown no excess stress levels.

The use of road whips and road marshals has been established in the time since this Government came to power. They were introduced when issues arose with the 1997 licence. I remember working with the Ward Union Hunt at that time, and there was much interaction between the hunt and the Department of the Environment and Local Government. The hunt introduced a team of road marshals to minimise disruption and sought meeting locations with off-road parking. Persons were appointed to proceed along the roads and control the hounds, employing two-way radios for communication. In addition, the number of people allowed to hunt on one day was reduced in order to reduce the impact of the hunt. All of this required the implementation of a balloting system for members.

The hunt introduced many conditions from 1997 onwards to try to alleviate concerns to do with the licence application. The road whips and road marshals play an important role in the Ward Union Hunt as they work to ensure the safety of the public and the well being of the stag, hounds and horses. They are in constant contact with the huntsman to ensure they know exactly where the stag is and the direction in which he is heading.

The Ward Union Hunt has an exemplary record in managing its herd of pure-bred Irish red deer, making it a unique ecological asset. If the ban proceeds, that entire heritage will be lost. I ask those who are genuinely interested in our natural heritage to consider this. The hunt has already introduced a number of regulations to ensure the highest animal welfare standards and has implemented a wide range of health and safety measures. Banning the hunt in order to address concerns over public safety and animal welfare is an excessive and unfair response, especially if other measures can be found to address these concerns. I repeat that the Ward Union Hunt is willing to engage with a view to exploring further possible health and safety measures. In that context, is a ban a proportionate response?

Over recent years, each hunt conducted by the Ward Union Hunt has been closely monitored by Government inspectors, and their reports have consistently not identified animal welfare issues. In addition, veterinarians from the then Department of Agriculture and Food conducted a major study of every deer hunted during the 1997-98 season and reported that the health of the deer did not appear to be affected in either the short or the long term after hunting. These are the facts. Hunting is not cruel to the deer and it is closely monitored by Government inspectors to ensure that this is so.

I question the use of animal welfare and public safety as a motivation for this legislation and have legitimate suspicions that the real agenda is a basic dislike of all forms of hunting and rural activities, which is informed by ideology rather than reality. The reality is so different, and I would love to see people experiencing the real hunt.

Let us further consider the alleged animal welfare concerns. An example of the Ward Union Hunt's commitment to the highest standards of animal welfare is its valuable service of a subsidised collection facility for the fallen stock of local farmers. The Ward Union Hunt has two specially equipped vehicles licensed by the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food for collections from farmers on a daily basis. Veterinary inspectors from the Department call to the Ward Union Hunt facility at the end of every day to examine and take samples from animals. Laboratory testing is then carried out on these samples to ensure prevention and early detection of bovine diseases such as BSE, and the facilities are audited annually. It processes around 4,500 cattle per annum, along with a large number of sheep. The Ward Union Hunt would not be able to provide this essential service unless it operated to the highest hygiene and environmental standards. The collection service is vital to the business of farmers in the area and also provides an important database to the Department on the movement of cattle. In view of this, who is it that really cares about animal welfare? There are positive actions being taken to support animal welfare around the Ward Union Hunt farm and kennels.

I emphasise that Ward Union Hunt hunts have been regularly monitored by Government inspectors and that animal welfare issues have not being identified. Proponents of the Bill are using emotive and incorrect sound bites to conceal their ideological objection to hunting and rural pastimes. It is also clear that there has been insufficient engagement with key stakeholders - the people who really do care about animal welfare.

This Bill and its impact on the rural community that I represent should not be exploited by anybody on any side of the House for cheap political gain. For me and for those I represent, it is too important. The Minister must be able to see that this Bill does not have the support of rural Ireland. The sheer number of people around the country involved in the Rural Ireland Says Enough campaign is evidence of this fact. A number of local authorities around the country have declared their support for the RISE campaign, including Meath County Council.

The Wildlife (Amendment) Bill will affect jobs. It will affect the local economy in Meath.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.