Monday 7 June 2010

The Unspeakable In Pursuit Of The…Really Quite Delicious, Actually

A pie shop owner may have to stop selling hare and pigeon pie in summer because of a 108-year-old law – which was devised before invention of refrigeration.

PJ's Pie Pub serves a variety of meat-based pies – but one particular recipe has led to an investigation involving Trading Standards, the Department for Environment, and local officials.
And reading on, you clearly see that the problem is not the law (for once).

It’s the interfering busybodies that iDave fondly assumes will only do ‘good works’ as part of his Big Society…
The furore began when the pub's hare and pigeon pie caught the attention of the Hare Preservation Trust, which has asked for enforcement action be taken.
And why?

Well, because in an attempt to preserve the hare, this law was passed:
The legislation in question, outlined in the Hare Preservation Act of 1892, stipulates: "It shall not be lawful during the months of March to July to sell or expose for sale, in any part of Great Britain, any hare or leveret."
The law was passed before commercial freezing was invented and designed to ensure that people caught with hares during those months could be prosecuted for having shot them in the breeding season.

A sensible law. One that, like many bylaws (no, not that ‘taxicabs must carry a bale of hay for their horse’ one!) has never been repealed because, well, it’s clearly not intended to meet 21st century life:
Owner Mike Pichel-Juan said: "A modern interpretation of the Act would have to take into account the fact they didn't have freezer technology in 1892 to preserve meat which was legitimately purchased from a game dealer. We only use hares which have been killed within the correct game season and then frozen.

"Nothing we do is contravening the spirit of the Act – which is about the safeguarding of brown hares during their breeding season."
Indeed.

Sadly, that reckoned without the sheer vindictiveness and maliciousness of the single-issue fanatic…
John Rimington, spokesman for the Hare Preservation Trust, said: "We are disgusted by the activity of this outlet. There were six times as many brown hares in Britain when the Act was passed as there are today.

"Not surprisingly, the brown hare is listed in the current UK Biodiversity Action Plan for declined species at risk of possible extinction."
They weren’t shot out of season, you immeasurable cretin, they are frozen!

And the hares aren’t declining because we are all suddenly eating them in pies!

A fact which – unless you are truly a grade A moron – you must know, and know well. So that makes you a cretin who will do anything for publicity for your cause.

Which though it might be a good one, is now tarnished by its involvement in another example of ‘Britain’s Stupidest Laws’…
A spokesperson for Boston Borough Council confirmed they are currently investigating the matter with Trading Standards, although an outcome is not expected for a few weeks.
Sounds to me as though they are now keeping their heads down, and hoping none of the opprobrium coming the trust’s way spreads to them.

Pity they didn’t take the opportunity to tell publicity-chasing John Rimington to do one at the time…
Mr Pichel-Juan concluded: "If the authorities tell me I'm breaking the law, I will take hare pie off the menu until after July. If I don't, according to the original 1892 Act, I could be fined 20 shillings."
Personally, I’d laugh, pay the 20 shillings in pennies and then walk out of the court eating a hare pie, one of a size that would make Desperate Dan salivate…

So what will the Hare Preservation Trust have achieved if he’s found guilty? Will the frozen hares be magically restored to life? No, of course not.

All they’ve succeeded in doing is making themselves look like small-minded, petty morons.

I bet they are collecting a nice set of comments on their blog too…

14 comments:

Macheath said...

A dilemma presents itself to the Hare Preservation Trust in its fight to maintain the species - who is the enemy?

On the one hand, dozens of poachers and illegal hare-coursers armed with shotguns trespassing on farmers' land - on the other, one enterprising chef serving a traditional delicacy made with legally-supplied meat.

'We are the Self-preservation Society - oops, sorry! - Hare Preservation Trust ...'

Brian, follower of Deornoth said...

"fined 20 shillings"

There'll be a £15 'Victim Support Charge' on top of that. Compo for the grieving relatives of the contents of that pie, doubtless.

dickiebo said...

A prosecution would be nothing but a hare-brained idea!

JohnRS said...

Just left our harey friends a comment, there's noting much there yet, so it's still worth a visit to say hello.

English Viking said...

Whence do the HPT get their funding, or is it just an unpaid hobby for mental defectives?

Bucko said...

They didnt publish my comment on their blog.

Chuckles said...

I was going to say it sounds like an anti-baldness organisation, the sort of thing one sees advertised by cricketers and snooker players, near the adverts for relief from 'itching, burning sensations'.

But instead, 'Waiter there's a hare in my pie', 'Will no one think of the pigeons'

SadButMadLad said...

The Hare Preservation Trust says "In another case involving a supermarket chain, although the hare was imported and therefore on sale legally it was withdrawn, probably to avoid adverse publicity."

So they have no problem twisting the law to their advantage in forcing a supermarket to remove from sale legal hare meat. But they like to be pedantic in forcing businesses to remove from sale frozen hare. Sorry, that doesn't work. If you are pedantic, you are pedantic in all ways, otherwise you are a hypocrite.

Edwin Greenwood said...

"...and then walk out of the court eating a hare pie, one of a size that would make Desperate Dan salivate."

Now I can't shake off this mental image of a burly gentleman striding purposefully down the steps of the court holding up a pie with huge leporine ears sticking out of the top of it.

JohnRS said...

Comment was there - now its not.

Typical. I'll bet I'm paying for them somehow as well.

Macheath said...

@JohnR -'Comment was there - now its not.

Well, that explains the mystery - I was trying to work out which of the 2 comments there could be yours, given a choice between:

'I couldn't imagine eating hare: they're such majestic creatures, its just not right.

and

'My heart just melts when I see such a beautiful creature.

Neither sounded quite right, somehow!

Mick Turatian said...

I'm afraid I disagree and think that the laws governing when game (not just hares) can be offered for sale are sensible.

I take the point about refrigerated meat and there's nothing to prevent anyone storing game in their own freezer and eating it whenever they like. Those of us who feel it's our human right to eat strawberries in the UK in December should take comfort from this.

As soon as the meat is thawed and processed its provenance or antecedents are unprovable so you only have the word of the seller that the meat was legally obtained and previously frozen.

That really isn't a good enough guarantee so the easiest and fairest thing to do is to have a closed season.

CJ Nerd said...

Ignore these activists. They're just the sort of people who enjoy rabbiting on.

JuliaM said...

"'We are the Self-preservation Society - oops, sorry! - Hare Preservation Trust ...'"

*chuckle*

Appropriate - if there's one wildlife society that should go over a cliff...

"There'll be a £15 'Victim Support Charge' on top of that."

Luckily, I think this one is outside the acope of that pointless little scheme. One iDave really needs to get on with repealing.

"A prosecution would be nothing but a hare-brained idea!"

:D

"Whence do the HPT get their funding..."

It doesn't seem to have charity status, so perhaps its claim to be entirely volunteer funded is true. Certainly, as a result, it's impossible to check easily.

"They didnt publish my comment on their blog."

Typical!

"As soon as the meat is thawed and processed its provenance or antecedents are unprovable..."

For a restaurant, governed by all the plethora of regulation and tax - not to mention H&S - legislation?

I don't think so.

"That really isn't a good enough guarantee..."

If it's a good enough guarantee for a person to store game in their own freezer, why not a restaurant?