Maureen O'Sullivan (Dublin Central, Independent)

It is appropriate that, even though they relate to the remits of two Ministers, we are debating the Wildlife (Amendment) Bill 2012 in advance of dealing with the Animal Health and Welfare Bill 2012. The Bill before the House is technical in nature and deals with the current hunting licence provisions relating to the shooting of wild birds and hares during open season. In the hunting of birds there is a need to put in place a protocol on the numbers of certain species hunted in order that we might monitor the impact. We must ensure changes in the level of hunting pressure are monitored and I wonder how it is proposed to do this. There is also a need to review the listed species of birds which are hunted in open season, particularly as some of these are of concern, both nationally and on an EU basis, in terms of their conservation. Wildlife in Ireland is a good indicator of the impact of environmental changes and, therefore, the question of monitoring is significant. We are aware that some species such as the breeding curlew and other breeding wader species are suffering a serious decline in numbers.

I will deal with the poor hare. I do not know what the hare has ever done to Irish society to justify the treatment meted out to it, first, as a result of many years of coursing and now by virtue of the fact that people will be able to shoot it. The Minister referred to open season which, for hares, will be five months long. However, open season for hares lasts all 12 months of the year.

My predecessor, the late Tony Gregory, was associated with a number of causes in combating illegal drugs and crime, promoting the interests of street traders and obtaining housing for people. Animal welfare was another cause central to his philosophy. It was one of his deep regrets that more had not been done to progress the issue of animal welfare before he died. In particular, he was concerned about the treatment of animals such as the hare, the fox, the badger and the stag. I am absolutely appalled to think the ban on stag hunting may be rescinded. That would be a retrograde step.

Tony Gregory was honoured to serve as vice president of the Irish Council Against Bloodsports when the late Hugh Leonard was its president. He used various mechanisms of parliamentary procedure to highlight the cause of animals and issues of cruelty. As the Minister is aware, in 1993 he sponsored a Private Members' Bill on wildlife. When he was introducing the Bill, he paid tribute to the democratic process for allowing an Independent Member to take that course of action. He considered that wildlife was a matter of immense public concern and interest and referred to "the welfare of the vulnerable and defenceless in nature's creation." He hoped his Bill would help to end the "mediaeval barbarity of live hare coursing." He acknowledged the pressure Members representing rural constituencies would be under to oppose the Bill. He also acknowledged that coursing clubs formed a very powerful lobby in some rural areas. Given that he came from Dublin Central, he was not under pressure from any lobby. However, he asked that Members be allowed to decide for themselves whether there was a need to change the cruel practice of coursing. This did not happen and, therefore, coursing was not banned in 1993. Many hares have suffered a cruel end as a result. I take the opportunity to state I object to the term "sport" being applied to coursing. There is no sport involved in either coursing or, as proposed in the Bill, shooting hares.

Tony Gregory was not the first person to try to have hare coursing banned in Ireland. The first attempt was made in November 1975 when the current President, Mr. Michael D. Higgins, then a Senator, tried to have legislation relating to wildlife being dealt with in the Upper House amended in order to have coursing declared illegal. His efforts in this regard were backed by another former President, Mrs. Mary Robinson, then a Senator, and the late Dr. Noel Browne. During the Committee Stage debate on the Wildlife Bill 1975 he stated, "My view is that the barbaric practice of hare coursing should be stopped immediately." One of the Senators of the day who was in favour of coursing made the following comment, "There is scope for escapes. Those hares are properly trained today." I wonder for what they were being trained. Another Member of the Upper House stated, "Coursing is fundamental to our greyhound industry." I do not agree with that assertion. There are only three countries, including Ireland, in which coursing is legal and other countries which have banned it have thriving greyhound industries. One of the Senators to whom I refer and who was in favour of coursing also stated, "The hares are adequately and perfectly cared for, both prior to the coursing meeting concerned and afterwards." I was bemused by the use of the word "afterwards", particularly as the former Senator in question was speaking prior to the introduction of muzzling. In such circumstances, I am not too sure how many hares would have survived coursing meetings and required care afterwards.

Mrs. Mary Robinson said, "Coursing is a very cruel sport" and referred to "the principle of trying to prevent unnecessary and deliberate cruelty to animals." The late Dr. Noel Browne referred to the hare as "one of the gentlest of God's created animals" and the fact that very fast greyhounds were used to inflict "inevitably and invariably, unnecessary pain on this tiny animal." He also described coursing as a barbaric practice. It is interesting that at the time in question the British House of Commons had just passed legislation to abolish hare coursing. As Deputies are aware, a high percentage of MPs in the House of Commons would have believed in blood sports. However, they passed an Act to ban the practice of coursing.

During the debate to which I refer the late Dr. Noel Browne commented, "Speaking as a psychiatrist, it is worth examining the kind of people who indulge in this masochistic practice." He also wondered about the emotional make-up of those to whom he referred in the context of their enjoying "the sound of an animal screaming to death, being torn to pieces." He associated that kind of enjoyment which what would have then been obtained in "the more disreputable night spots in Soho." I do not think one would have to go to Soho to obtain such enjoyment nowadays because I am sure it is available much closer to home. I should note that all of the points made in the 1975 debate came prior to the Irish Coursing Club being forced to muzzle dogs at enclosed coursing meetings. The next political push to have hare coursing banned was initiated by the current Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Alan Shatter.

Let us consider what the supposedly humane practice of muzzling has done for the hare. About one month before each meeting club members go out into the countryside to collect hares in a process known as "netting". This involves a gang of supporters shouting and yelling to herd hares into nets which have been strategically placed. The hares are then put into boxes for transport to the coursing venue. These are another two instances of cruelty, but the Bill does not go into much detail on this aspect. The next stage of the process involves training hares. Perhaps the animals have a better chance of survival if they are the subject of coursing rather than being pursued by hunters with guns. However, that is debatable. Releasing a wild hare into a coursing field produces what coursing supporters see as very poor sport because it would not know where to run. During the training weeks hares are kept herded together in a enclosure. This adds considerably to the stress suffered by the hares which are solitary creatures and keep to themselves in the wild. They do not live together in groups. In captivity, therefore, they are very prone to disease which can spread more easily when they are kept together in an enclosure.

As a result of the level of secrecy relating to coursing and other blood sports, it is difficult to obtain accurate statistics for them. It is also difficult to know who to believe. We are informed that on coursing days each hare should only be coursed once. However, it is important to note in this regard that coursing clubs are monitored by coursing officials, not by an independent body.

It is clear that the practice known as "blooding" is widespread. I know this for a fact because many greyhound owners state their animals must be blooded before they can take part in coursing. They use rabbits and kittens for this practice to enhance the performance of the greyhound. The owners of greyhounds who want to race their dogs on tracks must first register them with the Irish Coursing Club. This represents an enforced subsidy in respect of coursing.

The majority are opposed to hare coursing. I am sure they would also be opposed to the hunting and shooting of hares. Many independent surveys have been carried out of this matter during the years. TheJournal.ie recently carried out a poll which showed that a considerable majority were in favour of banning hare coursing until, very suddenly, the numbers of those in favour of it not being banned rose. It was at that point that the staff of TheJournal.ie discovered an attempt to rig the poll - they have proof of this - by people who were pro-coursing.

All animal welfare organisations are opposed to coursing. What, therefore, is the justification for trapping hares or any other animals and using them and their pain as a form of entertainment? There is only a small minority who get pleasure from and bet on hares fighting for their lives as they are chased and terrorised by greyhounds. The activity of coursing is one-sided and the same side always wins. Greyhounds might be muzzled, but the hares are terrorised, injured and some have died. The hare is fighting for its life and is not aware that the greyhound is muzzled. Muzzling does not prevent hares from being tossed up in the air and injured. The lucky hare that reaches the escape area without being caught by the dogs is caught in an enclosure. We do not know what happens to those hares because we do not have the figures. They probably live to fight another day. Perhaps they are released to be shot under the terms of the Bill before the House. The animal we are talking about is chased by the greyhound, which is a much bigger animal.

See this speech in context