Killing Tradition: Inside Hunting and Animal Rights Controversies

3. The Hare-Coursing Controversy

171 chapter 3 The Hare-Coursing Controversy The Hunting Act 2004, known colloquially as “the ban,” signaled a monumental legal change and social divide in Great Britain. The contentious effect of the act was to outlaw hunting with dogs in England and Wales after February 18, 2005. Parliament spent over 700 hours debating the ban in 2004, and one index of its political as well as social significance is that the debate consumed more time than military, environmental , social welfare, and economic legislation—although reporters noted that the rhetoric swirling about the Hunting Act involved all these matters (Prescott 2006). Especially conspicuous in the battle over the ban were divisive cultural issues raised by animal rights activists’ moral and modernist claims and hunting supporters’ appeals to preserve national heritage and rural folklife. Either venerable traditions or acts of depravity, depending on the side taken in the acrimonious debate, foxhunting and hare-coursing events drew large crowds in the days before the law went into effect. The organizers of the famed Waterloo Cup in Lancashire, a three-day hare-coursing competition held annually since 1836, rescheduled its event to precede the enactment of the ban and drew major media attention as the final stand for Hunting Act opponents (Bocquet 2003). Although it claimed fewer adherents than foxhunting, hare coursing held a central symbolic significance in the discourse, with supporters frequently referring to its revered ancient lineage; this aroused protesters to underscore its grossly anachronistic status. There are abundant references in British literature, especially from the nineteenth century, Part of the estimated crowd of 400,000 participants holding banners and signs as they parade through central London during the Countryside Alliance “Liberty and Livelihood” march, September 22, 2002. The protesters were demanding the right to continue hare coursing and foxhunting, as well as pressing for action to help the rural economy. (Photo by Scott Barbour/Getty Images) The Hare-Coursing Controversy 173 to coursing as the “great national sport” (Sirius 1876, 210). Whereas supporters presented hare coursing as a noble countryside tradition with wholesome images of outdoor life, protesters likened the event to shameful, vile blood sports such as cock- and dogfighting.1 According to media analysts, coursing received the greatest negative publicity during lobbying for the Hunting Act; it was characterized as being the least necessary of all the field sports and having the smallest number of participants. However, it also raised a countercampaign warning of a domino effect extending to the human amenities of meat consumption and leather use (Thomas 1983, 198). Public focus on the Waterloo Cup revolved around the drama of ending a recognizable ritual of British heritage that signaled continuity with nineteenth-century imperial self-confidence. The Waterloo Cup held just before the ban went into effect attracted its largest crowd in years, but not all attendees were there to celebrate the sport. The chase Marchers protest the Waterloo Cup hare-coursing event, February 14, 2005. Signs proclaim, “the end iS near,” “fight cruelty,” and “hare today, Safe tomorrow.” (Photo courtesy of League against Cruel Sports) 174 KILLING TRADITION on the field garnered less public attention than did the clash of protesters and supporters of hunting. Supporters characterized themselves as environmentally conscious country folk under attack from selfrighteous urban “antis” who were trying to impose their views on others; antis condemned what they called the “barbaric cruelty” of the “pros” intent on tormenting or “hounding” innocent hares in a civilized country . The supporters’ rhetoric of “antis” suggested that protesters were outsiders taking a stance against supporters rather than for animals. The protesters’ use of “barbaric” located their ethical basis in modern, civil society, and it suggested that the supporters, in their staunch defense of tradition, had been bypassed by progress and ethical development. Police struggled to separate the antagonistic sides and appeared flummoxed by the intensity of the emotion and even the violence engendered by the issue. In late September 2004, angry pros burst into the House of Commons while a crowd estimated at 10,000 gathered outside. Other rallies drew hundreds of thousands of demonstrators. The high-water mark was a “Liberty and Livelihood” march through central London on September 22, 2002, where 400,000 participants protested the ban as governmental interference with the rights of communities to engage in traditional practices (“Timeline” 2005). At the Waterloo Cup, signs The Waterloo Cup from a “Sporting Events and Starts” card (no. 48), Senior Service Cigarettes...