Boxing Day Meet, East Sussex and Romney Marsh Hunt, and Southdowns and Eridge

How can a council excuse a hunt from a Public Space Protection Order, when they are imposing it on everybody else?
Email Campaign

Update 19th November 2023

Instead of answering our genuine concerns, Rother District Council has decided to stop listening to us by blocking Protect the Wild’s emails. But we have found another way. All you need to do is complete the form below, and the council will receive the emails anyway – until they block us again. But we have yet another way up our sleeve, so if I were you, RDC, I’d make a proper statement about this asap.

You can also copy and paste the email (below) into your own email and send it yourself. The addresses you need are:

 
Council Officers:
Licensing Officer- Chris.Godfrey@rother.gov.uk

Quick Facts

  • The East Sussex & Romney Marsh Hunt and Southdowns & Eridge Hunt (amalgamated) are holding their Boxing Day Meet on Abbey Green and High Street, Battle, Sussex.
  • They will bring their hounds, and the hounds will not be on leads.
  • There is a Public Space Protection Order (PSPO) in place for this area, which states: “A person in charge of a dog shall be guilty of an offence… if he/she does not keep the dog on a lead”. It is also a breach of the PSPO if a person who is in charge of [a] dog at the time fails to remove the faeces from the land forthwith.
  • Rother District Council (RDC) imposed this PSPO in January 2021. They are the enforcement authority. Breaches may also be reported to Sussex Police.
  • On 10th November 2023, one officer from RDC unilaterally decided in advance of Boxing Day that they will not enforce the Public Space Protection Order  for the hunts. They quoted (adding yet another typo!) this paragraph from the Rother and Wealden District Councils Environmental Policy  to justify it:
    5.2 “There are circumstances where a contravention may not warrant action or it may [not] be appropriate.*”
  • The council gives this as the reason for making an advance decision not to enforce the PSPO: “no action will be taken because it would not be appropriate, the dogs are associated with the Hunt, which is a traditional publicised event, which occurs infrequently, for a short duration.”
  • PSPOs are an additional piece of law created and imposed by a local authority. The legislation behind it is the Anti-social Crime and Policing Act 2014. This Act makes breaching a PSPO a criminal offence. If someone commits an offence, they can offer a “reasonable excuse”.
  • A “reasonable excuse” is open to discussion. However, Rother District Council are offering the hunt a “reasonable excuse” by announcing in advance that they will not enforce the PSPO.
  •  This means the Council have given the Hunt permission to break the law they themselves put in place for the protection of the public.
  • The hunt is not local to Battle. They are based in Ringmere – 20 miles away.

 

Rother District Council and their decision

Lorna Ford, the council’s CEO, explained the decision:

“Although the PSPO (Dog Control) does require dogs to be on leads in this area of Battle, the Council has discretion whether it enforces [sic], as set out in section 5.2 of our enforcement policy.

In this case, the Head of Service-environmental health [sic], licensing and community safety decision (as the delegated Officer) is that no action will be taken because it would not be appropriate, the dogs are associated with the Hunt, which is a traditional publicised event, which occurs infrequently, for a short duration.” 

They also said:

A PSPO cannot been suspended, there is no legal means of doing so. The Council can decide not to enforce any legislation. The decision not to enforce, in the case of the Hunt meeting, is rationale (sic)  and reasonable, for the reasons previously explained to you, the Hunt is a traditional event, well-known occurring infrequently for a short time period.” (9th of November 2023)

NB AAF is not responsible for the multiple grammatical and syntactical errors, or the malapropism, in the Council’s responses. We have copied their responses directly.

Local Authorities and Local Councillors must act lawfully. To decide in advance not to enforce legislation, let the perpetrators know, and therefore encourage them to break the law, is not within the remit of the council, which must obey the rule of law. 

What can we do about it?

RDC has decided not to communicate any more on the subject. However, we are not prepared to accept their decision. Last year, Somerset Council tried to use “emergency powers” to close roads for Boxing Day hunt meets, because the hunts hadn’t bothered applying for them. With the help of Protect the Wild, we objected, and the Council withdrew their decision. There were many similarities. The questionable decision was taken by a council officer, and not a councillor. The legal grounds were very slim indeed. The council was facilitating law breaking.  They knew the hunts were planning on obstructing the highway (which is illegal) and they were not only going to let them do it, they were going to make it easy.

East Sussex and Romney Marsh Hunt – law-breaking and Boxing Day violations

The hunt has a history of savage killing of wildlife, violence towards sabs and monitors and failure to comply with any restrictions imposed on them in Battle.

English Heritage (EH) manages Battle Abbey. Last year, the hunt assured English Heritage that they would not block the road or meet in front of Battle Abbey. But this is exactly what they did, as this video shows.
Further :
  • The road and access to the public car park were blocked; EH specifically stated it should not be.
  • The Gatehouse and footpath area were blocked; EH had stated it should not be
  • Riders took their horses on to public footpaths, which is illegal.
  • The hunt did not use barriers, and took no safety precautions for the public
  • The hunt ignored their own risk assessment.
  • Traffic was live and a danger to the public attending the event.
  • There was no clear traffic management
Road Closure 
The road has a limited closure for the  Parade using the Town & Police Clause Act 1847, Section 21(TPCA). This Order confirms that the highway cannot be closed. Item 4  states:  ‘The making of this Order does not authorise or otherwise make lawful the obstruction of the highway nor shall it be interpreted as giving such authorisation‘  The use of a TPCA Closure only allows the Parade to proceed; it does not authorise for roads to be blocked. This type of order is usually used for Remembrance Parades where the event ‘proceeds along the highway‘ but does not stop, block up or close the highway. The hunt always blocks the road.

 

A selection of incidents from this hunt

In 2020, Sam Jamie Mepham from the ERSM Hunt repeatedly drove his tractor into a sab vehicle. He was charged, pleaded guilty (the video evidence was clear) and received a 12 months driving ban and 12 months community service. He had a previous conviction for killing a wild animal with a crossbow and possession of ammunition without a licence.

In November 2019, a drone caught hounds from the hunt killing a fox. The fox’s head was torn off while still alive.

In 2018, a rider from the hunt assaulted several sabs. The rider was due to appear in Hastings Magistrates Court, but she died in a hunting accident before she could be brought to justice.

Also in 2018, the hunt rampaged through a cat sanctuary owned by the Celia Hammond Animal Trust. Some of the terrified cats did not return. It was assumed that they were killed.

On Boxing Day 2019, there were violent scenes when a hunt supporter tore a megaphone away from a protester.