Petition - Snaring in Scotland

[eeyore]

Originally Posted by stripee

It would seem that there are many organisations and wildlife trusts who are for banning snares or for limited snaring, I don't think you could say that these responses are all from irrational extremists.

I would support a rational call for limited snaring and for banning free runing snares without stops (tho the problem with policing a device that can be made in under a minuite from a piece of picture wire would still remain).

It is worth noting that when I was using snares to protect GNB I was actually working for a wildlife trust.

However the call to ban all snares without looking at how they are used and why, and indeed not to kill any wildlife ever for any reason , is indeed the province of the "irrational extremist".

[stripee]

The Scottish government will take all views into consideration, eeyore, I expect, and come to their decision. Which will probably be sensible. It's up to anyone who wants to sign the petition to sign it, noone is forced to if they disagree. I have noticed, though, since the hunting Act a concerted effort to rubbish animal welfare organisations, in order to make out they are extremist, I was reading only yesterday in the doc's surgery a rubbishing of the RSPCA by Country Life. OK maybe they get some things wrong, but they also do some good. Is everyone supposed to consider these mainstream organisations as extremist now???

[stripee]

IOSF - International Otter Survival Fund

A link to one of the charities campaigning against the use of snares. It has some otter recording noises on it Snares were used in Ireland in the badger cull there. I think, as I said above, you have to make up your own mind and sign or not sign. Or if you think that limited use iin specific circumstances is the best option. Also, as I've already said, the need for conservation of birds for instance, is largely down to past and present farming practices. A couple of months ago there was news that farming was continuing to cause a widespread decline of birds in the UK. Economic reasons for snares on shooting estates is another question, although I noticed news this week of 2 gamekeepers being found guilty of poisoning protected birds of prey. That's all about money and big money

[eeyore]

Originally Posted by stripee

I have noticed, though, since the hunting Act a concerted effort to rubbish animal welfare organisations, in order to make out they are extremist, I was reading only yesterday in the doc's surgery a rubbishing of the RSPCA by Country Life. OK maybe they get some things wrong, but they also do some good. Is everyone supposed to consider these mainstream organisations as extremist now???

I certainly wouldnt consider the RSPCA an extremist organisation, but then their stance on snaring is pretty much the same as mine (ie only stopped snares and only to be used when other methods of control arent possible, and to be set in a responsible manner), as an organisation they have their feet on the ground.

ISOF also have a point - i certainly wouldnt support the setting of snares with a min dia that could catch otters - however a stopped fox snare will not catch an otter as the latter has a significantly smaller body.

As you know from other threads I am very active in the protection of badgers, and again I would not support setting snares for them (doing so is illegal in anycase), and any that were accidentally caught in fox snares should be released (like foxes badgers dont tend to throttle themselves in a stopped snare as they are bright enough to realise they cant get away) That said I have never seen a badger caught in a fox snare, their posture when foraging is different so they will go under the average fox snare line.

When I mentioned extremist organisations I was thinking more of the pure animal rights groups whose demands often have no grounding in reality or the practicalities of the countryside. That said I also have as little time for the extremists at the other end of the spectrum who advocate killing every furry thing that crosses their sights

you are right in saying that habitat destruction is the reason behind a lot of bird populations dropping - however some (such as stone curlew, bustard, some terns etc) have dropped to a point where even minor predation seriously threatens their survival as a species - okay it would be a good idea to restore the habitat , but this may not be possible , and even if it is will take many years - in the meantime it is necessary to support them by controlling the predator population

[stripee]

I agree, eeyore, with most of what you say. It is hard to disagree, as another said on this thread, you are the voice of reason on many things The Scots have usually been very sensible in their law making. It is a pity that wildlife has to pay the price for human mis-management and greediness.

[muldonach]

Originally Posted by stripee

The Scottish government will take all views into consideration, eeyore, I expect, and come to their decision. Which will probably be sensible. .............. I was reading only yesterday in the doc's surgery a rubbishing of the RSPCA by Country Life. OK maybe they get some things wrong, but they also do some good. Is everyone supposed to consider these mainstream organisations as extremist now???

I am afraid I do not share your confidence in the rationality or sensibility of the Scottish Parliament on matters like this. They took all views into consideration on the question of tail docking for example and in their wisdom chose to ignore all rational arguments for the exemption of working dogs, as a result there is now a steady stream of spaniels for adult tail amputations.

I rather suspect that on this question, as with others, any rationality will go out the window and political self interest will rule.

regards
mac

[muldonach]

Originally Posted by eeyore

I certainly wouldnt consider the RSPCA an extremist organisation, but then their stance on snaring is pretty much the same as mine (ie only stopped snares and only to be used when other methods of control arent possible, and to be set in a responsible manner), as an organisation they have their feet on the ground

A very logical post and one that I can share quite a biit of common ground with.

Snaring should not be seen as an either/or scenario, it is normally used to provide a sanitary cordon around the boundary of a sensitive area, or localised protection round a hotspot such as a release pen, lambing field or nesting area, and is complimentary to other methods such as lamping.

The main advantage of snares is that they are there and working 24/7 and their purpose is to prevent problems from foxes arising in the first place.

Regards
mac

[flowerofedin]

Originally Posted by stripee

I agree, eeyore, with most of what you say. It is hard to disagree, as another said on this thread, you are the voice of reason on many things The Scots have usually been very sensible in their law making. It is a pity that wildlife has to pay the price for human mis-management and greediness.

Seems strange though that as the date of decision gets closer, eeyore defends his beloved snares with increasing vigour, knowing that although he thinks he has explained what should be, the reality is very, very different. Is he running scared? Only time will tell what the decision is. Public reasoning would suggest that a ban is in the air. Neither do I believe this hogwash about dogs needing treatment for broken tails... This is scare tactics, and I won't have it. AfA is not an extremist group.

[hunterswind]

Spoke personaly to someone in the know today. The farming / shooting lobby has won so far

[willing to learn]

Originally Posted by flowerofedin

Seems strange though that as the date of decision gets closer, eeyore defends his beloved snares with increasing vigour, knowing that although he thinks he has explained what should be, the reality is very, very different. Is he running scared? Only time will tell what the decision is. Public reasoning would suggest that a ban is in the air. Neither do I believe this hogwash about dogs needing treatment for broken tails... This is scare tactics, and I won't have it. AfA is not an extremist group.

Its not hogwash at all I personally have seen more poor Springer spaniels and cockers, than I care to remember with infections so serious ans severe theres been no alternative but to amputate their tails. (A quick painless dock at 3 days or before. As at this stage they feel little pain as their nervous system is not fully developed),Would save major surgery on a gangrenous tail.
But there is a up side vets make even more money. never mind the poor dogs suffering. This is FACT
Regards
Colin