Trail hunting in today’s society is unnecessary and cruel. Although Britain banned fox hunting in 2004, many have claimed that trail hunting (which remains legal) acts as a ‘smokescreen’ that allows people to continue to fox hunt undetected. [1] Chris Luffingham, the Director of Campaigns at the ‘League Against Cruel Sports’, argues that trail hunting has been immorally designed to ‘(mimic) traditional hunting as much as possible. In fact, it so closely mimics hunting; it has become clear it is a deception and cover-up for illegal hunting activity’. [2] It is clear that trail hunting is simply a sport that has been created from a loop in the Hunting Act. Trail hunts still use hounds, unlike other forms of non-lethal hunting in the UK. The problem with this is that the dogs are still trained to follow and track the scents of animals, notably foxes, in the countryside whilst the hunt is taking place. [3] This means that during a trail hunt, it is likely that the hounds may end up killing an animal after tracking it’s scent. The National Trust testifies that trail hunting is being used as a ‘false alibi for the hunting of foxes, deer, mink and hares with dogs’, making the practice the same as the now banned traditional hunts. [4] Trail hunting continues the same immoral practice as traditional lethal hunts and should be banned completely in order to prevent any further encouragement to harm animals in a hunt. Many campaigners for hunting would argue that hunting has a great history that should be continued. However, in the UK, hunting now is elitist and outdated. Trail hunting only helps to promote the classist values that traditional hunting has done since the 18th century. Hunting has always culturally been a sport associated with the wealthy. Trail hunts in Britain remain accessible to the elite only, rather than it being the sport of the everyman. In order to join a trail hunt you must not only own your own horse/trained hounds and buy a plethora of equipment, but must also be a member of a Hunt Secretary’s organisation, including paying regular subscription fees. The terminology and dress of trail hunting remains elitist to this day, there are ‘Masters’ and ‘Hunt Servants’ who wear red coats or hunt livery while out hunting, whereas ‘Gentleman subscribers’ are only permitted to wear black coats. [5] The overall order of a trail hunt is therefore rooted in old classist values, where the most wealthy and influential have different titles and different dress from others, making them easily identifiable. In the 21st century, do these elitist values need to remain so clear within the sport? Although seeing the flurry of red coats and shiny buttons on people as the hunt leaves may be wonderful to see, it should be remembered that the sport has limitations in it’s accessibility, and that only the most wealthy and influential can be a part of that crowd. Sports should remain approachable for all despite monetary and societal differences, and this is something that trail hunting fails to achieve. Trail hunting also fundamentally fails to achieve its aim of ethical morality, which is why it was created in the first place. It is for these reasons that I believe that the activity should be banned, just as most forms of hunting have already been following the 2004 Hunting Act. If you would like to know more on trail hunting and the differences between traditional fox hunting, drag hunting, and trail hunting, I’d recommend ITV’s summary: https://www.itv.com/news/2020-11-24/what-is-trail-hunting-and-is-it-legal [1] ‘Trail Hunting’ (https://www.league.org.uk/trail-hunting) [2] ‘Hundreds of illegal hunts took place in British countryside last autumn, animal rights group says’ (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/hunts-illegal-hundreds-autumn-season-figures-animal-rights-hunting-ban-england-wales-a8286336.html) [3] ‘Don't be fooled by Boxing Day trail hunts – they're just as cruel as illegal animal hunting’ (https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/boxing-day-hunts-trail-hunting-foxes-animal-cruelty-a8127611.html) [4] ‘Trail hunting faces ban on National Trust land as members threaten rebellion’ (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/trail-hunting-ban-national-trust-land-members-rebellion-a8011861.html) [5] ‘Fox hunting in the UK: facts, history and the law’ (https://www.countryfile.com/wildlife/fox-hunting-facts-history-and-the-law/)

**It's not realistic to completely ban trail hunting when there's clearly [a demand for it] (https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/trophy-hunting-africa-lions-biodiversity-habitat-endangered-animals-iucn-a9087366.html). All we can really do is introduce amendments to the 2005 law that banned traditional hunting, to regulate the trail hunting variation.** Traditional fox hunting was banned in 2005 - and trail hunting has since become the most popular adaptation of the sport. It's a hunt that follows a pre-laid animal-based scent, and in theory, doesn't harm any foxes or other animals. However because the success of non-harmful trail hunting depends on the discretion of those who take part in it, this can easily not be the case. The main argument against this form of hunting is that it works as a smokescreen for people to go on following genuine fox scents and having dogs kill them. From a legal perspective, all that can be done is to prosecute those cases where it's obvious that the simulative aspect of trail hunting has not been abided by. And many of these prosecutions have been successful. Banning all kinds of hunts would most likely lead to hunters resorting to illicit/even less law-monitored expeditions. If we want to tackle those who don't act per the 2005 law, the best course of action is tightening the current legal framework. This is also the approach recommended by the [RSPCA] (https://www.itv.com/news/2020-11-24/what-is-trail-hunting-and-is-it-legal) - who have said that animal products should be banned when laying trails and that trail maps should be provided to local police in advance of the hunt.