The Hunt, the Footage, and the Failure of the Law
On 28 December 2024, in Sutton Green near Wrexham, the Wynnstay Hunt was being observed by the dedicated Cheshire Hunt Monitors when a chillingly familiar scene unfolded. Whilst in a woodland, the hounds suddenly broke into “cry” — that unmistakable, frenzied howling triggered when they find the scent of a fox.
Seconds later, a terrified fox burst from cover, sprinting across an open field directly in front of the monitor’s camera. Moments behind came the pack of hounds in full pursuit.
This wasn’t an accident. It wasn’t “trail hunting.” It was fox hunting — and it was filmed.
- NB the video below proves hunting taking place but does NOT show a fox kill *
The monitor couldn’t get between the fox and the hounds so, unable to help the fox herself, she immediately alerted the hunt, informing them that a fox had been seen and was being chased by hounds -and that it had all b
een recorded. Sometimes, when caught red-handed, hunts will act fast to call off the hounds. But not always. And not this time.
Huntsman Henry Bailey was told, clearly and directly, that the hounds were in cry and chasing a live fox. His response?
He said: “Steady.”
No urgency. No sharp “leave it” — the standard command used by huntsmen to stop a chase. No crack of the whip. No attempt to take control of the situation. Any experienced huntsman, saboteur and monitor, knows that how you deliver a command matters. A muttered “steady” was never going to stop a pack of hounds in full pursuit and Bailey knew it.
But that was the point. They wanted the chase. They wanted the hunt.
But, it wasn’t just Bailey. Whipper-in Hartley Crouch and the hunt masters did nothing, though they are just as liable for the hunt. No one made a serious effort to stop the hounds. No one acted to prevent what was clearly an illegal pursuit of a protected species.
Recklessness and hunting
Yet despite this damning footage, the Crown Prosecution Service dropped the case. The reason? “Insufficient evidence.”
This is the brutal reality of the Hunting Act 2004: a weak, outdated piece of legislation riddled with loopholes and grey areas. Hunts have learned to exploit it with confidence. “Trail hunting” is routinely used as a smokescreen for illegal hunting. Unfortunately, the police and CPS — often lacking the expertise to recognise key indicators of illegal activity, or lack of action from hunts — are left with their hands tied.
One glaring flaw in the current law is the absence of a recklessness clause. If such a clause existed, Bailey’s failure to act reasonably could have been grounds for prosecution. His inaction was clearly reckless – in legal terms, “the taking of an unjustified risk by the accused that leads to unlawful harm or damage” – yet under current law the ‘reckless’ action that led to an illegal hunt taking place isn’t enough to prosecute. And so, time and time again, foxes are hunted, footage is captured, and cases are dropped.
The law is being flouted in plain sight — and nothing changes.
That’s why Protect the Wild has launched a new MP petition tool. The government has repeatedly promised a proper, enforceable ban on hunting. But we’re still waiting. How much longer will animals be allowed to suffer while politicians delay?
This campaign demands real action — not in five years, not in three months, but now. We’re calling on MPs to publicly commit to allocating parliamentary time for a new, enforceable hunting ban. One with teeth. One that finally closes the loopholes. One that delivers on the promise made back in 2004.
No more vague promises. No more excuses. No more foxes chased to exhaustion and death.
