Chamber and committees

I have a question about enforcement—I will be guided by the convener if he feels that it does not fit here.

We have discussed the enforcement of the section 6 exception relating to no more than two dogs being used for sporting activity, and we have been talking today about rough shooting and how it might be difficult to ascertain which dogs were used, who was using them and so on.

If that limit was removed, would there not be enforcement issues, because activities would take place with more than two dogs? Would there not be issues around enforcing the limit in non-sporting areas, such as mounted hunts? Would there not be confusion?

I guess that what I am getting at is that, although we have heard that there are enforcement issues relating to the limit in this instance, if it was not there, would there not be other enforcement issues?

I am a Labour Party list MSP for the North East Scotland region.

Alex Hogg talked about the different breeds of dog that are used in different activities to flush different kinds of prey. Are foxes ever flushed on a rough shoot?

Yes, although I think that there is still some confusion.

Mr Ewing did say that he would consider reducing the shoot to only two dogs due to fears about vexatious accusations.

I just wanted to establish, which I think we have, whether some form of enjoyment and killing could take place, and it sounds like it could.

Does it follow that the absence of hounds does not necessarily rule out foxes having been flushed and killed in that activity?

On that point, do we have any data on the proportion of rural residents who take part in rough shooting?

In what way will having only two dogs prevent enjoyment?

Yes.