This has got to stop

[Rob_D]

Sea eagle found poisoned by banned pesticide on estate - Scotsman.com News

Sorry if this is already posted, but I just saw it. Another WT Eagle poisoned on the Glenogil Estate. They already had a "fine" of £107k for previous offence. This time, any penalty must be at least 10 times that amount. Unbelievable that it's been repeated.

[earthdragon64]

Makes my blood boil, the whole absentee estate ownership in Scotland needs to be looked at. Too often estate owners either don't know or don't care what's being done in their name on their estate.

Often the highest level of fine is just pocket change to these people. Perhaps it's time to forget the fines and give the estate owners some time in prison instead. Maybe a loss of lliberty for a while would make them pay a bit more attention to complying with the law.</rant>

[jaykay]

Originally Posted by earthdragon64

Makes my blood boil, the whole absentee estate ownership in Scotland needs to be looked at. Too often estate owners either don't know or don't care what's being done in their name on their estate.

Often the highest level of fine is just pocket change to these people. Perhaps it's time to forget the fines and give the estate owners some time in prison instead. Maybe a loss of lliberty for a while would make them pay a bit more attention to complying with the law.</rant>

Well put Earthdragon, I totally agree

[Madonplants]

Originally Posted by earthdragon64

Makes my blood boil, the whole absentee estate ownership in Scotland needs to be looked at. Too often estate owners either don't know or don't care what's being done in their name on their estate.

Often the highest level of fine is just pocket change to these people. Perhaps it's time to forget the fines and give the estate owners some time in prison instead. Maybe a loss of lliberty for a while would make them pay a bit more attention to complying with the law.</rant>

This is sickening and totally agree with everything you have said. Fines are not the answer to someone like this.

[Foz]

Maybe a law should be introduced to force these estates into public ownership?
One offence you pay a massive fine, second time you lose you home?
Just a thought for those north of the border........

[pressld2]

We need to tread a little carefully here...

"Mr Dodd is appealing against the decision. He has always maintained the innocence of himself and his staff."

If he (or his staff) are guilty then they deserve the full weight of the law on their heads. But if it's someone else using the pesticides on Mr Dodd's land without his knowledge or permission then it's a whole other story.

I do agree that the only fine that has any meaning for a multi-millionaire is one that stops him from being a multi-millionaire.

Dave P.

[Ukwildlifeo]

Sadly it wont stop. Police don't have the time or will to prosecute and I can't see a judge sending down a lord for something as 'silly' as killing a few eagles. A cynical view I know but with all these cases there is always no evidence and no one saw anything, except for one case where a lowly gamekeeper kept a diary of his kills and had some dead buzzards in his freezer, not many are that stupid.

Its a shame all gamekeepers arnt as educated/informed as some of those on WAB

[Burdy]

Originally Posted by Foz

Maybe a law should be introduced to force these estates into public ownership?
One offence you pay a massive fine, second time you lose you home?
Just a thought for those north of the border........

Would be highly effective! It's not like this happens accidentally

[thebeard]

Originally Posted by Ukwildlifeo

Sadly it wont stop. Police don't have the time or will to prosecute and I can't see a judge sending down a lord for something as 'silly' as killing a few eagles. A cynical view I know but with all these cases there is always no evidence and no one saw anything, except for one case where a lowly gamekeeper kept a diary of his kills and had some dead buzzards in his freezer, not many are that stupid.

Its a shame all gamekeepers arnt as educated/informed as some of those on WAB

well said, it is true that although many people break the laws set in the WCA and other legislation, its quite incredible how many either get away with absolutely nothing or a fine which is simply pocket money, which is worthless in comparison to the money they can get from ignoring the laws and continuing with their actions. for example, legislation concerned with bat conservation seems quite strict but there is a document somewhere, which i'll try and find, which gives details of actual penalties that people actually recieved after commiting crimes against bats, and a lot of the time they are miniscule.
Unfotunately there are a lot more pressing issues in upholding the law, and sadly, as much as we'd like to protect wildlife, human are the priority.

saying this though, its strange just how ignorant of the law some landowners are, even if they are trying to protect their own 'interests'

[SheffieldLass]

When you see the list of cases on or close to that estate, the owner should be deemed unfit to run an estate and banned from running it as a shooting estate for a significant number of years. People are banned (and fined) from owning dogs if they have mistreated them badly, others fined and banned from driving if they have driven recklessly, so why not fine and ban landowners from running shooting on their estates if they are breaking the law to the extent that appears to be happening on that estate.

But it all comes down to getting the evidence. So when a poisoning first occurs, the police should then be given the right to enter at any time, unannounced to check for any signs of further illegal activity. Or indeed, in the same way that food premises are subject to unannounced visits by the environmental health officer, perhaps something similar should be introduced for shooting estates, as a matter of course. The trouble is, there are large areas on these estates where there is no public access so they can operate their illegal activities with very little chance of being seen and caught redhanded. Covert surveillence is not possible. As some people argue about CCTV, there is nothing to fear if they are not doing anything wrong, so the same should apply here. And if it is an outsider doing it to cause mischief then it would be in the interests of the estate to have them caught by the police, and their name cleared.