 |
 |
Following the question posed re the photographs on the previous page. |
An investigation by advertising watchdog, the Advertising Standards Authority, has uncovered major failings in press advertisements placed by the RSPCA last year in support of an unsuccessful parliamentary bill to ban hunting with hounds.
In an adjudication published on 4 November 1998, the ASA found that the RSPCA: used a photograph that was “not genuine” misrepresented official Government policy made a false implication about the way in which hunting is conducted. These damaging findings come at a time when the anti-hunting lobby is struggling after finding no convincing reply to two pro-hunting demonstrations that brought 120,000 and 300,000 people to London.
The RSPCA advertisements subject to investigation were published in November 1997, and used headlines: "Whatever you think of foxes, you have to admire their guts." and "How much longer can foxes tolerate this kind of pain."
The photograph in one advertisement claimed to show a hunted fox that had been killed by disembowelment. In fact, as the RSPCA later admitted, the picture was of a fox that had been shot dead, then partly eaten by hounds some time later.
The ASA upheld a complaint that the picture was not genuine, and did not represent what happened to a fox killed by a hound. The ASA also asked the RSPCA "to ensure that they could demonstrate that the pictures used in future advertisements were representative."
Nigel Burke, Countryside Alliance Head of policy said: "The ASA has exposed claims by hunt prohibitionists. The photograph claimed to show a hunted fox killed by being torn apart. The true story is that the fox was shot dead and then fed to hounds. That is how the anti hunting lobby works. They use pictures of animals that are killed quickly by shooting or by hounds, and pretend that the post-mortem damage from hounds is what caused death. It is contemptible to exploit people’ s emotions in this way.
If everything that the anti-hunting campaigners say about hunting is true, and their monitors are out every day with cameras, why do they have to use a sham photograph?"
The RSPCA advertisements claimed that foxes are not an agricultural pest problem, citing the Ministry of Agriculture’s position as "the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food estimates the number of lambs taken by foxes to be not significant."
The Countryside Alliance submitted to the ASA an actual text of the Ministry’s position, which reads "The Ministry does not consider foxes to be a significant factor in lamb mortality nationally, but it should be stressed that this is against a background of widespread fox control by farmers."
The ASA asked the RSPCA "to ensure that they did not select quotations in a way that could mislead in future advertisements."
CA head of policy Nigel Burke said: "The RSPCA is an important campaigning organisation, and misrepresenting Government policy like this will damage its credibility at the highest level. Worthwhile work such as the quarantine campaign will be harmed unless the RSPCA distances itself from the cowboy tactics of the anti-hunting lobby, and gets back its proper agenda."
In the text of these advertisements, the RSPCA claimed that among hunted foxes "death usually occurs by disembowelment." The Countryside Alliance submitted photographic evidence that the hunting technique of foxhounds is to kill quickly by biting the neck or upper spine of the fox. The ASA dismissed the RSPCA’s view, and asked the RSPCA not to repeat its claim. In an advertisement concerning stag hunting, the ASA upheld a complaint that the advertisement gave the impression that stags are caught and killed by hounds. In fact, stags are brought to bay, (a defensive posture,) and shot with a licensed firearm or humane killer, a fact which the advertisement concealed. The ASA did not uphold a complaint that the advertisement was wrong to say that "scientific analysis reveals a litany of suffering" in hunted stags because some experts did not support that view. The Countryside Alliance accepts the ASA’s decision not to uphold the complaint, although all parties recognise that the Bateson report referred to was not supported by all other experts at the time of publication. The present situation is that new science has uncovered fundamental errors in the Bateson science, and members of Bateson’s own scientific panel have withdrawn somewhat from his original claims, and called for research into ways for hunting to continue. The ASA adjudication held that it was legitimate for the RSPCA to claim that pregnant deer are hunted. The Countryside Alliance accepts that they are, but points out that deer pregnancy lasts nearly a year, and is not a visible nor a physiological burden until the end. 90% of foetal weight is gained in the last six weeks of pregnancy, by which time seasonal hunting has ceased. Deer pregnancy is not, therefore a welfare issue, as the anti-hunting lobby might hope that a layman would assume. Nigel Burke said: "Truth is breaking out all over on this issue. The expensive lobbying efforts and sharp practices of the anti hunting lobby are being exposed. The scientific report used by the National Trust to ban deer hunting has been contradicted by superior scientific studies. The prohibitionists missed their wave earlier this year, and the ASA investigation has accelerated the slow puncture in their political credibility." For further information please contact the Press Office: tel - 0171 582 5432 fax - 0171 793 8899 e-mail - info@countryside-alliance.org [IN THE COUNTRY] [NEWS ROOM] [THE CAMPAIGN] [GET CONNECTED] [THE ALLIANCE] [HOME] [CONTACT US] [SEARCH] © Countryside Alliance 1998 created by P.White & P.Latham - - - www service by Data Text /cutting ends