Category: Animal law

Finn’s Law – better late than never.

Finn’s law came into force in June, 2019

Injured German Shepherd with stab wounds.
Finn the police dog with stab wounds to head and chest soon after major surgery to save his life.

Why did it take so long to protect UK police dogs and horses with Finn’s Law.

Until recently police dogs and horses have always been treated just as a piece of police equipment or property. Countries have been extremely slow at recognising the need to protect them and it has often taken too many tragic incidents and thwarted campaigns to force lawmakers to do so. The UK, the great nation of animal lovers, has followed its usual path in lagging behind other countries in protecting service animals and like most countries has only done it through public pressure.

New Zealand has protected its police dogs since 2008 with the Policing Act 2008 (Killing or injuring Police Dogs) and has recently increased the punishment under the Policing (Killing a Police Dog) Amendment Bill 2016 to 5 years in line with many other countries and 2 years for injuring a dog plus a NZ$15,000 fine.

The USA has had protection in place since 2000 under the Federal Law Enforcement Animal Protection Act with up to 10 years in prison and a $1000 fine for assaulting, maiming or killing federal law enforcement dogs and horses following many attacks on them and drug dealers putting bounties on narcotics sniffer dogs, but State laws vary.

Police dog handlers have to fight for the rights of their dogs.

Finn's Law. Injured police dog
Major the police dog paralysed in a stabbing with his handler, Officer John Jorgensen.

On the 12th. November, 2010 in Roseville, Minnesota, USA, Officer John Jorgensen sent  his police dog Major into a wooded area to chase after intruders and within minutes he found Major covered in blood and rushed him to the vet where he was found to have suffered four stab wounds puncturing the lung and damaging the spinal cord resulting in permanent paralysis of his hind legs. Although it was a felony to kill a state police dog, assaulting one was treated at the time as a mere misdemeanour so the attacker only served 4 months. The officer was so appalled at the lack of protection of his partner that he began a campaign for more stringent laws in the State which he succeeded in.

In August 2013 in Adelaide, South Australia a police dog named Koda was  stabbed in the chest in the line of duty when he caught up with a knife-wielding man following a burglary. He was stabbed in the chest causing a 8 c.m.-deep wound and was rushed to a vet where he underwent emergency surgery and survived.  The incident was greeted with public outrage as no law existed to prosecute the offender and following a campaign a new law, known as “Koda’s Law” was introduced.

Finn's Law. Police horses wearing eye and face shields and leg protection.
We are already having to kit police horses out with protective gear to avoid injuries.

On the 5th. October, 2016 in Stevenage, Hertfordshire, UK a 16-year-old boy stabbed a police dog named Finn in the chest and head causing life threatening injuries, but he survived following surgery and weeks of treatment. It sparked outrage and there was a campaign, including a website and Facebook page for Finn, involving his handler PC Wardell to enact a law to protect them , something that should have been included under the Animal Welfare Act back in 2006 but was either overlooked or not felt necessary.

UK Government slow to introduce Finn’s Law and come to the rescue of police dogs and horses.

A petition was launched which stated “I propose that UK police dogs and horses be given protection that reflects their status if assaulted in the line of duty. This would be similar to the US Federal Law Enforcement Animal Protection”, but prior to the petition being debated the Government responded by saying “It is unnecessary to give police animals the same legal status as officers in light of the penalties already in place”. This was not helped by a delay caused by Sir Christopher Chope MP who unbelievably objected to the new proposed law.  Such is the UK’s commitment to animal welfare.

Despite this a new amendment, the Animal Welfare (Service Animals) Amendment, to the Animal Welfare Act, which has been dubbed “Finn’s law,” was finally  debated by the Lords and came into force on 7th. June 2019. It is obviously better late than never but it seems sad that we haven’t found it necessary to help our police dogs and horses much sooner.

Is it time to reduce the usage of animals on front line duties?

Having such a law is obviously to be applauded, but it is not unfortunately going to solve the problem of attacks on police animals in the future and brings into focus the danger we put these animals in on our behalf. It raises the question of whther it is ethically and morally fair to intentionally put animals in harms way in the first place?  Would it not be better to restrict them to ceremonial use or purely as “search” and “sniffer” dogs who appear to have a fun time at work.

Updated June 2020

Police Horses’ Lives Matter Too.
Finn’s Law. Do police horses have enough protection

Hunting with dogs and the “unenforceable” ban.

The UK Hunting Act 2004 was never going to work.

Hare, hare coursing, illegal hare coursing, cruelty to animals, animal welfare
Watch out, there’s a hare courser about.

Whenever there is talk about the Hunting Act it tends to revolve around fox-hunting but other forms of hunting with dogs were also banned particularly hare-coursing. Fox hunts were not disbanded, but given an olive branch and allowed to flourish through drag or trail hunting and remain popular events with the public particularly the festive Boxing Day hunts.  Traditional fox-hunting with dogs is still legal in Northern Ireland and hare coursing events continue in southern Ireland. This has allowed hunts to continue to breed and keep their hound packs for the day traditional hunting is made legal again.

In the case of hare coursing, although there is an outright ban, there has been little protection for the hares as illicit coursing continues unabated  in some parts of the country, particularly eastern England and just like fox hunting the police and enforcement authorities have no way of stopping it even though they have more powers than for fox hunting. They have been forced to use hundred year old laws like the Night Poaching Act 1828 and Game Act 1831 to help combat it as the Hunting Act is so useless. Some Police authorities have stated that it is more prevalent now than before the Act with hundreds of dogs abandoned, injured and killed as a result. [More on hare coursing in a future post]

The Act was badly conceived mainly because the Government tried to appease all sides of the debate and did not consider the practical aspects which has made the law a bit of a farce and has resulted in some forms of hunting of foxes and hare coursing to continue.

Hare, hare coursing, illegal hare coursing
There is not let up for the poor hare with gangs of hare coursers roaming the countryside.

The UK Hunting Act 2004  is so complicated and full of loopholes that law enforcers try not to involve themselves in investigating alleged offences  because obtaining sufficient evidence to put before a court is costly, time-consuming and a nightmare. This becomes obvious when you read the various websites and reams of advice issued to try to clarify the subject .

So what is hunting with dogs?

The legal definition under the Hunting Act 2004 of hunting is:

  • to pursue or kill for sport or food;
  • to try and find by diligent searching and to pursue and capture;
  • to pursue or approach stealthily or to move silently through;
  • to drive (a bird or animal, especially game bird) from cover.

The Hunting Act 2004 describes 5 punishable offences:

  • Hunting a wild mammal with a dog;
  • permitting land to be used for hunting a wild mammal with a dog;
  • permitting a dog to be used for hunting a wild mammal;
  • participating in, attending, facilitating or permitting land to be used for the purposes of hare coursing;
  • entering, permitting or handling a dog in a hare coursing event.
A wild mammal is defined or considered to be a mammal which is living wild, bred or tamed; in captivity or confinement; escaped or released from captivity.

Basically on the face of it any live mammal is protected from being hunted or pursued by dog(s), but of course this would be too easy and so to appease the hunting lobby,  hobbyists and pest controllers there are exemptions which can be exploited to continue fox-hunting.

The “Unenforceable ban”

So it is legal to use dogs to hunt rats, rabbits and wounded shot hares, but there are several farcical loopholes that hunts can use to continue hunting almost normally under what is known as the “unenforceable ban” which include:

using 2 dogs to “flush a fox out of cover” to be shot by a qualified marksman if it is being done to prevent damage to property, food crops, timber, fisheries or biological diversity, but of course the marksman could miss and the fox escape with the trained hounds in pursuit.

“flushing a fox to a bird of prey“ which allows a hunt to take a bird of prey along and as many hounds as they wish to flush out a fox “for the purpose of enabling a bird of prey to hunt the wild mammal” as long as the bird is capable of catching  the animal such as a large eagle owl.

But the major loophole was allowing drag or trail hunting to continue, a situation that was always a recipe for future trouble, a fact well anticipated by the hunters. Allowing packs of hounds to continue careering around the countryside was always going to lead to confrontations with foxes and you can almost imagine the Master lining the hounds up for their pre-hunt pep talk :

“Right lads normal tactics today, you know the drill. Try and keep on track, but if you get a whiff of a real fox scent and happen to veer off in its direction do not make it too obvious lads as we will all be in trouble-know what I mean, [Wink Wink]”.

Hounds of course are not going to go against their natural instincts and sense of smell obtained over countless generations and many huntsmen are not going to pass up a golden chance to hunt a real fox when the opportunity presents itself.  Although it would be heartening to believe that not all Hunts participate in any wrong doing realistically many probably do. Everyone knows that the excuses that the chase was purely accidental or unintentional and the hounds were out of control are always going to be difficult to legally dispute. The act of hunting must be proven as predetermined or intentional which is difficult to show in most cases.

Anti-hunt saboteurs continue to monitor hunts

Many potential court cases are dropped by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) due to what they view as a lack of tangible evidence and those that do reach court are rarely successful in regard to fox-hunting, but there have been many successful prosecutions for hare coursing. The Police and RSPCA do not have the time, and in the case of the Police, the inclination to keep an eye on the hunts which results in anti-hunting charities and hunt saboteurs having to continue monitoring hunts. This in turn causes friction leading to often violent disturbances. In practical terms it is impossible to keep track of the freely roaming hunts which are often held on private land.

There was a golden opportunity missed to completely halt hunting with dogs if the law makers had only banned drag hunting and the keeping, breeding and use of packs of hounds, but this was too easy. If the day ever arrives when hunting with hounds is made legal again, they will be ready and waiting to step in with all horns blaring complete with all the equipment and facilities to begin again.

Related Articles:

Hares beleaguered on all sides & on the run.
Hare Coursing – barricading the English countryside
Boxing Day Hunts still attract crowds & violence.