Official Report: Minutes of Evidence

The Chairperson (Ms D Armstrong): I welcome members of the Hunting Association NI (HANI) to the meeting. We are joined this morning by Susan Vance-Walford, Declan Feeney, David Turley and Brian Turtle. I invite you to brief the Committee, and then we will move to questions from members.

Ms Susan Vance-Walford (Hunting Association NI): Thank you, Chair and Committee, for giving us the opportunity to speak to you today and to give evidence. We have brought together a group of people with different experiences of hunting in the rural economy. We feel that it is important that the Committee hears about the wider picture rather than a single perspective.

There are four things that we hope to demonstrate today as we talk to you. First, there is the practical relationship between hunting and farming, including pest control and the services provided to farmers, such as Brian and Declan, by huntsmen and hunts. Secondly, there is the wider social and community contribution. Hunts bring together people from a lot of different backgrounds and communities, and they often support charitable and local events in their area. Thirdly, there is the connection between hunting, point-to-points, horses and the National Hunt. Those do not operate in isolation. People, horses and businesses regularly move between them, including across the border in both directions. Finally, there is the economic impact. In the wider rural and equestrian economy, there are people whose livelihoods are directly or indirectly impacted. David and his family are an example of that.

We will also make one important point about the evidence surrounding the alternatives. We believe that the Committee needs to look carefully at whether the alternatives to hunting provide the same practical service in the circumstances being faced by farmers. It is not enough simply to identify an alternative in theory; we need to understand whether it is available, economical, affordable, practical and effective on a daily basis for those who need to avail themselves of it.

The people speaking today will bring together different perspectives, and we hope that, together, that will give the Committee a fuller picture of what is happening and who may be impacted.

I will now hand over to Brian.

Mr Brian Turtle (Hunting Association NI): Good morning, Chair and Committee. I am a livestock farmer from County Antrim. I have a farm in partnership with my wife and son, and I assure you that I would rather be at home farming this morning than sitting here.

Our farm borders a major river in County Antrim, and we do our best to farm in an environmentally responsible way, as most farmers do. We have been using low-emission slurry spreading. We have been direct drilling to reduce carbon. We have planted a lot of hedges. We have reduced protein in livestock diets to reduce emissions, and we have fenced off watercourses to keep the water as best we can. We keep beef cattle, pigs and sheep, and we grow a bit of grain for our own use.

I will talk to you this morning about something that we know only too well as sheep farmers, and that is the damage that foxes can do. In our farm business, we have lost a lot of lambs over the years. I can tell you first-hand what can happen during lambing. A fox can take one of a pair of twins or a triplet while the ewe is still giving birth to another one. The ewes lamb outside, as a lot of sheep do. They lie down and lamb and punch out the first, and they get up and lick it. Once the first one straightens up, the ewe lies down again to birth the next one. That is when Mr Fox comes along and the lamb disappears. I have seen that at first hand.

In 2025, we had a particularly bad attack. We had a group of 40 ewes lambing and lost 15 lambs worth about £2,000. It was 25% of the crop at a lamb and a half.

How do we know those figures? Sheep are scanned. Nine out of 10 farmers scan their ewes. They are in batches: you lamb the singles together; you lamb the twins together; and you lamb the triplets together. If you go out in the morning and find that your ewe has only one lamb but she was scanned for two or find that she is distressed and is looking for the lamb, you will know for a fact that something has happened.

It is not about just our sheep farmers. Our free-range egg men get a bit of a hammering from foxes as well. They lose hens to foxes. Free-range is high-welfare, and people want high-welfare eggs. The losses go against the investment and hard work in that sector. That is why I would be concerned if this became law. If hunting with dogs were banned, how would farms like ours protect themselves and keep fox numbers under control? We need practical, effective ways to protect livestock.

As for the page that farming is on in 2026, there is a load of pressure out there. Bovine tuberculosis (TB) is rampant. Our herd of cattle is all right at the minute, but nearly every one of our neighbours has a herd that is down with TB, and that is difficult. We vaccinated our sheep against bluetongue. We made what, I think, is a wise investment, because bluetongue is here — it is all around us — in the UK and the Republic of Ireland. Rising costs make things difficult. Our tax system does not make it easy. We do not need increased pressure in respect of protecting livestock. It is difficult.

There is something else that a lot of folk do not realise: local hunts provide a valued fallen stock collection service. They remove dead animals promptly from farms at a reduced cost and more cheaply than the commercial alternatives. That reduces biohazards and the spread of disease. Often, a huntsman will ring a farmer and tell them what their animal died of. Huntsmen might not be veterinary surgeons, but they have a lifetime's experience in this, and that is a big help. I have driven up to Stoney Road beside us with animals that have died. That is not too bad for me, as I live only 30 miles away. If I lived in Fermanagh, it would be a different story, as it would cost £70 or £80 in diesel. If the Bill goes forward, we risk losing that big, valued service. We would face a lot more losses of lambs, and a highly valued form of pest control would disappear.

I ask those of you who are making the decisions to listen to the farmers and to the people who walk the walk and live the life. I ask you to think carefully about the long-term consequences. I am not here to gurn and be a grumpy farmer who is looking for something. We are not looking for special treatment. We are just asking for practical means to protect our livestock, to make a living, to be sustainable — farmers have grasped sustainability; do not think that we have not — and to keep our farms going for the next generation.

The Chairperson (Ms D Armstrong): Thank you very much.

Ms Vance-Walford: We had planned to show you a short video at this point, but, unfortunately, we cannot. I thank the Clerk for having shared that video with you already. Instead, we will show a PowerPoint presentation to illustrate the community that we are talking about.

We are talking about an activity that is tied to the communities that we operate in. Our membership crosses all boundaries — age, gender, background — and is brought together in this shared interest. All of our members support their communities through charity events and their work with farmers and everyone else involved in those communities. Like our horses and hounds, those bonds cross borders. That is especially the case for someone like me, who was brought up within miles of the Monaghan-Cavan-Fermanagh border. Those borders are also crossed by the hunt-run point-to-point races that we support and work with. Many of those horses graduate to the National Hunt network. You will remember some of them, like Corach Rambler and Nick Rockett, from their Grand National fame: they point-to-pointed in Ireland. We have put some statements up on the screen for you: those people's words reflect, much better than anything I would stumble over, that network of shared passions and the context in which the Bill would have an impact.

Mr Declan Feeney (Hunting Association NI): I am a professional huntsman to the East Down Foxhounds, situated in Seaforde in County Down. I have been a huntsman for 27 years. There has been a hound kennel in Seaforde from 1768, with kennels that were built in 1841 and are still in use today.

I will explain some of the practical services provided through the relationship between the hunt and the farmers. One of those is a call-out service that, farmers know, they can contact whenever they have a problem involving foxes or other pests and in a range of circumstances for which they need assistance. It is a local service that is based on people who know the farms and the countryside and understand the conditions in which farmers and rural people work. Local knowledge is important. If a farmer has livestock that are at risk, they do not necessarily have the luxury of waiting several days or weeks for someone to become available. The ability to make a phone call and have professionals who know the area attend is extremely valuable.

The other area that I will talk about is fallen stock. Our farmers have the highest standards of animal welfare and care anywhere in the world, but animals die on farms, and the farmer has the responsibility to deal with those animals properly. That can create a practical and financial problem, particularly for smaller farms. The arrangements connected with the hunts provide farmers with a practical way of dealing with fallen stock readily and economically, seven days a week. I am not suggesting that that is the only possible system; the point I am making is that it is an existing service that has developed between hunts and the farming community over generations. The Committee needs to consider what would replace that relationship if it were to be removed or significantly changed. It needs to ask who would provide the call-out service; how quickly farmers would be able to access assistance; who would deal with the additional costs; and what would happen to the services that are currently provided through the hunt. Those are practical questions, not political questions.

From my experience as a huntsman, I know that the relationship between the hunt and the farmer goes well beyond the practice of hunting and helping with pest control. It is a working relationship based on local knowledge, professionalism, availability and trust. I ask that the Committee consider those practical services when looking at the Bill. Thank you very much.

Mr David Turley (Hunting Association NI): Thank you for the opportunity to speak. I speak from the perspective of someone whose family and businesses are connected directly to horses and the rural economy. My family owns some of the land at Downpatrick racecourse. We are farmers who operate a horse feed company and are point-to-point horse trainers. I own a business that services the equine industry in Northern Ireland. We are deeply involved in all aspects of the equestrian sector.

I will highlight one aspect of the draft legislation. Northern Ireland is well known for breeding, producing and developing National Hunt horses, and point-to-point racing is a vital part of that production system. It is a vital training ground for the horses, jockeys and trainers alike. It is my opinion that, without point-to-point racing, we would not have achieved the success that we have in so many disciplines on the international stage. There is an irrefutable connection between registered hunt clubs, point-to-points and National Hunt racing. The hunt clubs provide the certificates of a horse's suitability for point-to-point; masters of the hunt are granted the Irish Horseracing Regulatory Board (IHRB) licence to run the point-to-points; and, importantly, upwards of 40 to 50 hunt club members voluntarily run each point-to-point race across the northern region, with the hunt club organising and paying for the vets, doctors and paramedics at the point-to-points. Without the structure of hunt clubs, point-to-pointing would end.

Hunt horses and point-to-point horses require feed, training, tack, transport, veterinary care, farriery, grazing land and stabling. Behind those services are businesses and employees. In a 2019 report commissioned by DAERA, Deloitte estimated that the equine industry was worth over £212 million to the Northern Ireland economy and supported over 3,000 jobs, with equine pursuits roughly broken down into eventing, showjumping, racing, hunting, pony clubs and pleasure riding. As point-to-point racing and hunting, at a minimum, would be decimated by the legislation, the losses would be startling. If one part of the rural community is affected, there could be consequences for other businesses that may not appear, on the face of it, to have anything to do with the legislation. I have many other examples that I will explain in due course.

I ask that the Committee consider not simply the number of people who participate directly in registered hunting but the number of businesses, jobs and families that are connected to the rural and wider equestrian economy. I ask that, at the very least, the economic consequences are properly assessed and a support package put in place. They are not theoretical consequences; they are real concerns for businesses like ours, for investment, for employees and for family livelihoods.

Ms Vance-Walford: Thank you, Madam Chair and Committee, for your time. We hope that our evidence demonstrates why the issue needs to be considered more widely. It is not about one activity but about a range of things: farming, pest control, communities, relationships, charitable activities, people young and old, horses, racing and livelihoods. We ask that you properly consider all the practical activities alongside the provisions of the Bill.

The Chairperson (Ms D Armstrong): Thank you very much. As regards the provisions in the Hunting with Dogs Bill, the hunting that you describe is wider: it is also about point-to-point racing and other recreational horse activities. The Ulster Farmers' Union (UFU) has established a new memorandum of understanding (MOU) for hunting across land. It is due to be in effect from 2027. How readily can that be enacted? Are your members abiding by the current MOU, which was established in 2013?

Ms Vance-Walford: Very much so. Some of us sitting around the table, me included, were involved in drafting that with the Northern Ireland Masters of Hounds Association (NIMHA) rather than on the UFU side. Our members have abided by that MOU since it was written and enacted in 2012-13, and we are ready to work with the updated version that will come in next season. Our association works with the affiliated associations that enact the MOU. Part of our job is to assist as and when. The MOU has proven to be effective. Cases have been raised with us, and the Countryside Alliance, UFU, NIMHA and HANI work together to enact the rules and regulations that the MOU provides.

The Chairperson (Ms D Armstrong): What is your response when you see instances, such as those that have been related to us, of huntsmen blocking roads? Does that fall outside the code of conduct?

Ms Vance-Walford: That is part and parcel of the code of conduct. It is also part and parcel of each hunt's code of conduct. Declan can talk about that. We have a hunts field master whose job it is to look after not only the mounted members but those following in cars. It is more likely to be the ones in cars who have blocked roads. We are out there doing what we do and enjoying what we observe, but we are also part of our communities. We want to exist for 300-plus years like the East Down Hunt has, and we will do that only by being courteous and following the regulations and agreements that have been laid out.

The Chairperson (Ms D Armstrong): Thank you.

Do you have anything to say on that, Declan? Do you have any observations on where you have, perhaps, encountered a landowner who did not want to allow the hunt? Will you take us through how the hunt deals with that?

Mr Feeney: Excuse me, Chair, but I am not the best at hearing. Will you repeat the question, please?

The Chairperson (Ms D Armstrong): When you encounter someone who says that they do not want to allow you over their land, what actions do you take to ensure that that is respected?

Mr Feeney: Before every hunt we have, I go out and speak to as many farmers as I can. There are so many farmers who own wee bits of land that it can be difficult to get to everyone, but I try to get to everyone. Because I have been there for 27 years, I know them all, and they all know me. If certain farmers say that they do not want us on their land, we will do all that we can to stop that happening.

What you have to understand, however, is that, when hounds are hunting a live animal, they will go where that animal goes. Unfortunately, I cannot say to a hound, "Please don't go on to that bit of ground". We do all that we can to stop that. I have a person who helps me called a "whipper-in". The whipper-in will be sent in to stop the hounds if it happens. If we are not allowed in on horses, we get off the horses and run in. If the hounds are not hunting, it is relatively easy to stop them — I can blow and call them. If they are hunting, it can be a wee bit difficult, but we achieve it. We sort it out. If a problem arises from that, we go back at the end of the day to liaise with the farmer, and we sort it out to the best of our ability.

Ms Vance-Walford: Part of the MOU is that remediation is made. If damage was done, it must be repaired within a suitable time. You would go back within 24 hours or preferably on the same evening, as Declan mentioned, and speak to the individual. If we are not allowed on land, we make all efforts to avoid that land. If the animal goes where we have not planned for it to go, the general field does not go on to the property; only the huntsman or whipper-in will go on to the land to retrieve the hounds, and then we move on to where we have been allowed to go.

Mr Turtle: May I speak as a farmer? I am in my 60s, which is the average age of a farmer in Northern Ireland. When I was at school, the hunt went over my father's land, and there was little communication. Communication between hunts and farmers now is tenfold what it was then. The local hunt would never come across my farm without engaging with me first. Often, the hunt will ask if there is somewhere that we do not want it to go. I have neighbours who are farmers and who move their sheep over a couple of fields to let the hunt slip past. Hunting has learned a lot from the experiences of the past number of years. It has changed from what it was a generation ago.

Mr Feeney: The farmer might say to me, "Declan, I would rather you didn't go there. We'll move the sheep across". I have even had farmers ask to me to come at such-and-such a time to help them get the cattle in before a TB test the following day. We help farmers in that way.

If anybody on our card goes hunting and does damage that cannot be rectified there and then, that has to be reported to the master, and it will be dealt with. If the repair is urgent because there is stock in the field, it will happen immediately, or we will liaise with the farmer to say that we will get it done the next day or whatever. We hunt from October to February, which is a time when most cattle are kept in and housed. There will probably be sheep in the fields, but, at that time, most cattle are housed, so 90% of the land that we go over does not have livestock on it.

The Chairperson (Ms D Armstrong): OK. Thank you. I want to move on to alternative hunting methods. Could hunting continue with, say, drag hunting alone?

Mr Feeney: From my experience as a professional huntsman, I do not think that farmers in east Down would put up with drag hunting, because there is no benefit to it for them; in fact, that is exactly right. In our hunt country, a pack of bloodhounds started to hunt the clean boot, which is man. That lasted for about 10 years before it fizzled out and was done away with. The East Down Foxhounds have hunted one way or another in Seaforde since 1768. If we wrecked and tore about, we would not be hunting. It stands to itself.

Ms Vance-Walford: Another point that it is important to make is that, under the provisions of the Bill, in drag or trail hunting, if even one dog diverted off the trail and went hunting, we would be liable. The risks are that, effectively, it is an accident waiting to happen. We do not consider it a viable alternative.

The Chairperson (Ms D Armstrong): Thank you.

Mr McAleer: I was going to ask about drag hunting, but Diana has already asked about it.

This is the first time during the evidence sessions that I have heard about fallen stock. For information, can you explain how hunting works to benefit farmers in respect of fallen stock?

Mr Turtle: It does what it says on the tin. Every farm has fallen stock — dead animals. Literally every farmer whom I have encountered will do everything they can to keep their animals alive, but stock dies. Farmers put ewes out to the tup at this time of the year, and, inevitably, one of them will drop dead. Farmers will also lose lambs in the summertime. The dead animals have to be disposed of properly. It is a legal requirement. Farmers used to dig a hole and bury the dead animals, but that is now illegal, and they have to be disposed of properly. It could be a calf or a big bullock. You have a number of options. You can subscribe to a commercial entity — a business — that will take it away and render it, or you can have the carcass collected by the local hunt.

I will be practical about it. A lot of farmers farm alone, and they are on their own in the yard. Most of them are older men. Imagine that you have worked hard with your stock, you have put ewes out to the tup, you have bought a ram with a bit of money, you have made sure that they have had lambs, you have scanned them, you have dosed them, you have looked after them, and then, at lambing time, you have a dead ewe or a couple of dead ewes. A lot of farmers do not want the dead cart — the lorry — coming into the yard. It is a mental thing. I have seen farmers in tears over stock dying. The hunts are a great way to get such stock away. A farmer can slip them on to a wee trailer, cover them up and take them off to the kennels. Nobody knows what he is doing up the road. You may call that pride or whatever, but it is about self-esteem. We as farmers feel as though we have failed when we have dead stock. The hunts can really help men in that regard, and they do. Generally speaking, it is a bit cheaper as well.

Mr McAleer: What do they do with the carcasses?

Mr Feeney: It is a lot cheaper. We are licensed with DAERA as an end user. When the animals come in to me, they are processed. They are skinned and taken apart. What can be fed to the hounds is kept to one side. You will have specified bovine offal and other things that we are not allowed to feed to the hounds. That all has to be separated and put in separate bins. We then have to pay to have that taken away once a week. Another rendering company comes in, takes away all the waste that we have left — the specified bovine offal that we are not allowed to use — and incinerates it.

Our highest price for that service for a bullock that is up to 48 months old is £70. The cost of using a local collection lorry for a bullock is £144 plus VAT: we charge £70. The cost of a lorry for a seven-day-old calf is £15: we charge £10. The cost of a lorry for a one-month-old calf is £19·50: we still charge £10. The cost of a lorry for a two-to-three-month-old calf is £22: we still charge £10. The cost of a lorry for a four-to-six-month-old calf is £57: with me, the cost for a four-to-six-month-old calf is £30. There is a significant difference. Farmers do not pay for the call-out. If a farmer rings for a lorry to call out, they have to pay for that. Everything that the call-out lorry charges is "plus VAT": we do not add VAT. We assist farmers, and our charges are minimal. We do not make money from that. We do it to help farmers, hence farmers allow us to hunt on their land.

Mr Turley: It is also worth pointing out that fallen stock can be dropped to the kennels seven days a week, as opposed to farmers waiting for a lorry that turns up once a week or, in some busier areas, twice a week. That waiting is a biosecurity risk, and it places an emotional burden on the farmer, who may have to see a fallen beast lying in the yard for three, four or even seven days, rather than having it removed to a local facility where it can be dealt with in an equally good or better way and more cost-effectively. It is a massive service.

Mr McAleer: This question is for Brian, as it is about the farming end of things. You mentioned biosecurity: from a farmer's point of view, do you have any concerns about the biosecurity of your land, given that hunts go through different farms? As you know, there are, for example, bacteria that could cause blackleg and, of course, TB. Do you have any concerns that hunts passing through farms could increase the risk of disease being spread between farms?

Mr Turtle: To be totally honest, that has not concerned me or farmers generally. We are not here to talk about this, because it is a different thing, but the concern that farmers have is about badgers moving from farm to farm, not about horses or dogs. I have never heard —.

Mr McAleer: If there was

on a farm, for example, and that was spread by the horses' hooves, would that not be a biosecurity risk?

Mr Turtle: No, I do not believe that it would. It is not a concern that I have heard a farmer express.

Mr Feeney: Remember that what we do is seasonal. It is done mostly in the wintertime, and an awful lot of cattle are off the ground at that time. The way that things are going, including climate change, cattle are out for a bit longer than usual, but 90% of cattle are in housing in the winter.

Ms Vance-Walford: The routes are planned with farmers when we talk with them beforehand so that we avoid livestock, because you do not want to do any of that. The routes are planned within reason.

Mr Feeney: Yes. A farmer can talk to me and say, "Look, Declan, I have dry cows out where you went last year. Try not to go there", so, to the best of our ability, we will try not to. I have gone to other farmers who have said to me, "That's not a problem, Declan. Hunt away. We have nothing out; everything's in".

The Chairperson (Ms D Armstrong): We now move to John Blair, the Bill sponsor.

Mr Blair: Thank you, Chair. I thank the witnesses for their presentations. I have a couple of short, sharp, general questions.

I have had the conversation about fallen stock before, as you will understand, in developing the Bill and at other stages since I came to the Assembly. Do you accept that there are farmers who would find it emotionally stressful for parts of their animal to be fed to the hounds and that that is why they do not use that service?

Mr Feeney: Sorry, could you —?

Mr Blair: Do you accept that some farmers are psychologically impacted or stressed by the prospect of having their fallen stock "fed to the hounds" and that that is one of the reasons why they do not use that service?

Mr T Buchanan: They are not vegetarian.

Mr Feeney: What is the alternative? The stock will just be incinerated, which will cost more money and be bad for the environment. The stock is disposed of properly. The parts that we are not allowed to feed to the hounds are incinerated in the proper way. We work closely with DAERA, and DAERA works closely with us. We have inspections every three months. It is a perfect way to dispose of an animal.

Mr Blair: That is not quite what I asked.

Ms Vance-Walford: Farmers are free to choose whom they bring their animals to. What is the psychological impact on a farmer of having to look at a dead animal outside their door for several days versus the psychological impact on them of knowing that that animal is being used as food in the way that a number of farm animals are? They are for consumption.

Mr Blair: It is a choice, really.

Ms Vance-Walford: It is a choice, and some farmers choose to use that service.

Mr Turley: Farmers are in the business of food production, and the food production process may, regrettably, end with hounds or dogs whereas the target is, obviously, the human market. I cannot really think of a farming mentality that marries up with a worry of that.

Mr Blair: I can. May I explain that to you through my next question? You answer has set the tone. Do you, as an organisation, accept that many farmers will not have a hunt about the place?

Mr Turtle: I speak as a farmer.

Mr Blair: I am not asking about you; I am asking about other farmers. Many farmers will not have a hunt about the place, and the signs on their land and their public expressions make that point. Do you accept that?

Mr Turtle: Yes, we accept that. We try not to go near those farms, but, in my hunt country, which is 18 square miles, I do not have a big problem in that regard. Yes, some farmers do not want me, so I do not go on their land. We try not to do that.

Ms Vance-Walford: There are farmers who want us and farmers who do not. The purpose of the MOU that we talked about is that agreements are in place with the UFU and its members. Not every farmer is a member of the UFU, but there are arrangements in place, and we, as an association, abide by those arrangements and the wishes of the people whose land we are, accordingly, on or not on.

Mr Blair: I have one final, general question. Do you accept that there are those involved in many aspects of the equine sector who would not, in any circumstances, participate in a hunt to kill a wild mammal?

Mr Turley: Yes.

Mr Blair: Thank you.

Ms Murphy: We have covered a lot of ground — pardon the pun — so I will not go back over it. I have some general questions, Chair.

On average, roughly how many foxes will be caught per hunt?

Ms Vance-Walford: Per hunt?

Mr Feeney: Per hunt?

Ms Murphy: On average.

Mr Feeney: Maybe how many per year would be a better question. Ideally, yes, that is what we set out to do. That is what farmers want us to do. We are there to control vermin. It is also important to note that we disperse a lot of foxes. If there are too many foxes in one area, that is when problems start. That is when fowl or lambs are taken. Much as we try to do the job of vermin control to the best of our ability, dispersing foxes is just as important as catching them. It is difficult to catch a fox in my area of the country because it is so overgrown and wild.

When a fox is out there, everything is in his favour; it is not in favour of the hounds. If he gets away, that is good enough. He will go away and breed a better and stronger animal the next time. The weak ones with mange, the older ones or those that have been hurt will be caught. However, catching them on top of the ground is a difficult thing to do. As far as I am concerned, if we mark it to ground, meaning that it goes into a hole in the ground, and the terrier men come in, I have done my job and that fox is accounted for. It is the terrier man, then, who liaises with the farm owner, and it is up to that farm owner to say whether he wants that fox dispatched or left alone. Once I mark that fox to ground, that is me; I am gone. It is up to the terrier man and the farmer.

Ms Murphy: There are traditional hunts that take place, most notably on St Stephen's Day. How many hunts occur each year outside the traditional hunt dates?

Ms Vance-Walford: As Declan mentioned, the hunt season generally runs from October to February. Hunts are out once or twice a week, depending on their size and location and the type of country, as well as the practicalities. You have to remember that the weather will have an impact as well. We will not go out on wet days to trample a man's land. With everything else that is going on, you cannot do that to a farmer who is already struggling to keep his nose above water. We work with the communities in which we live, and we have close bonds with them. It is about respecting each other in both directions. The short answer is circa once a week.

Ms Murphy: I have one final question, Susan. You mentioned trail hunting in your opening remarks: would your organisation support an amendment to the Bill to include trail hunting as an alternative to a traditional hunt? You mentioned potential issues with the Bill that relate to the possibility of a dog veering off course during a trail hunt: if that was addressed by way of an amendment to the Bill, could your organisation support it?

Ms Vance-Walford: There are no amendments that we can foresee that would make this workable.

Ms Murphy: By "we", do you mean your organisation?

Ms Vance-Walford: Yes.

Mr Wilson: You have covered some interesting territory on the matter of landowners. If enacted in its current form, the Bill would criminalise landowners who knowingly allow a hunt to take place on their land. You mentioned an interesting incident during which someone said that they would prefer that it did not happen on their land: I am not sure that, if the Bill were to be enacted in its current form, what that person said would be enough to mean that they had technically opted out of allowing you on to their land. I am curious about your view. How do you see the Bill working when it comes to adjudicating on whether a person is content for you to be on their ground? In that context, what does the word "knowingly" mean in reality? You told interesting stories about how a hound can break away and enter someone else's ground.

Mr Feeney: I do not really get where you are coming from. If I am not allowed on the land, I do not go on it. If, on occasion, the hounds go on it and the farmer is there and says, "I do not want you there", I say, "Can I just go and get them?". The whipper-in and I will then go and get them. Nine times out of ten, the farmer will be happy with that. If I go out on a day's hunting in Loughinisland, beside where I live, I will know every farmer. I will know which ones do not want me to go on their land, so we will endeavour to stay away and not go near there.

Mr Turley: It is worth referring again to the memorandum of understanding with the UFU. From next year, farmers' written permission will be required, so the vagueness will be gone. There is no vagueness in the area where Declan comes from because, as he says, he knows every farmer and exactly which field is which. It is astounding to hear Declan and some of the masters talk about who owns each field in the 20-mile radius of our hunt; their knowledge is unbelievable. Beyond that, we are talking about having written permission to distinguish where we are welcome to hunt from where we are not, so, from the hunt's point of view, the vagueness will be gone.

We do not have an answer to your questions about the Bill's proposals and how a definition and all that —

Ms Vance-Walford: A legal definition.

Mr Turley: — will work. I just do not see it.

The Chairperson (Ms D Armstrong): We will have a final follow-up question from Áine.

Ms Murphy: Declan touched on terrier work. Once a hound enters the ground, you hand over to the terrier men. By comparison with the type of hunting that you do, Declan, how effective are foot packs?

Mr Feeney: Foot packs do exactly the same as I do; the only difference is that I ride a horse. Foot packs also mark to ground and work with terrier men. There is no difference between foot hunting and hunting on a horse; hunting with a pack of hounds is done in exactly the same way. The only difference is that I ride a horse because I cannot be bothered to run. [Laughter.]

Ms Vance-Walford: That is as good an answer as any: it is easier.

The Chairperson (Ms D Armstrong): Thank you very much for coming in. It has been useful to hear your presentation.