Badger Sett interference

[FUDGEY]

Hi folks, Im hoping someone can advise me here on this one. The other day I found a Badger Sett I knew about had been disturbed in a big way. Here are the facts of the matter. It was on MOD land in a field which had a lot of gorse in it. I was pretty upset to find the fiels totally cleared of Gorse the other night and the Sett had been ran over several times with a tractor which in turn collapsed it in places. Anyway as I was pretty angered by this I phoned Scottish National Heritage to get advice. They told me to contact the Police without hesitation which I did. I met the Police up near the Sett and as the Range had a military exercise taking place they had to go to the control tower to get clearance. To cut a long story short the Police returned with a Range employee and they informed me that a license had been granted to the MOD for the farmer to carry out this work on the land he rented. I was informed a survey ahd been done and that they knew where all the Setts were on this land. Now if they have a license they have a license fair enough (but Id rather they didnt) but what I would like to know is once one of these licenses is obtained is it procedure or acceptable to run over a sett in a tractor several times? Surely if they knew the Sett was there as they claim they could hand cut the gorse in this section or better still leave the gorse that is around the Sett? I ahve tried phoning Scottish badgers and have had no reply. I hope someone in the know can help me here as I am pretty miffed about the way this has been done.

[PMG]

Well I'm no expert but how can or does a licence allow someone to basically destroy a sett that is in use? We know its illegal to even be on the spoil of the sett by definition of law so I would want to know how a 'licence' allows this kind of action to be taken? I reported the same sort of thing when a private woodlands estate felled trees over a badgers sett and left a huge amount of brashings all over it. I was well aware it was the estates wooodland and the ground it was growing on belonged to them, but I wanted them to know that members of the public are watching what happens in private places ......... it had a public footpath thro so I wasn't there illegally.

Ok so the farmer leases this land from the MOD - so what - I would say that fact and his 'licence' still doesn't allow him to intentionally and recklessly disturb and destroy a used sett. Mither the police - see if a prosecution - or at least a 'hand slapping' can be brought about. At least that lets this particular farmer know that he can't break the law whether its his land or lease land he has paid for - he should still respect things that live there.

Personally I'd like to arrive at his farm with a large wrecking ball and do a bit of damge and see how he likes it - but thats just me

[JeffH]

Hi Fudgey,

If, as appears to be the case, the landowners/farmer have been granted a licence by SNH to carry out the work in question and if the work has been carried out in accordance with the terms of that licence, then it seems to me that there is nothing further that you can do about this matter, regrettable as it is.

As to the nature and extent of the work permitted under the licence, one would really need to know the precise terms of the licence in order to judge whether or not its terms had been breached - eg. does the licence actually permit the destruction/damage to the sett as you describe it or does it simply permit the clearance of gorse within the vicinity of the sett and without permitting any damage/disturbance to the actual sett itself?

From what you have said, it would appear that the police officer who attended the scene was satisfied that the work had been carried out within the terms of the licence - assuming that he/she even saw it ! But if you have doubts about this, you could always ask the MOD or SNH to confirm the terms of the licence - perhaps citing the Freedom of Information Act if either body is unwilling to provide you with this information

In summary, until you know exactly what the licence permitted the landowners/farmer to do it's impossible to say/know whether or not what was actually done is or is not illegal.

See below for some information on SNH's guidance/procedures for granting Badger Licences in relation to land management -

Land management - Scottish Natural Heritage

The Forest Practice guide mentioned on that page is particularly informative.

Hope that helps

Jeff
(Schedule 1 Licence holder for Kingfishers, Barn Owls and Avocets)

[FUDGEY]

Thanks folks, Im just waiting on SNH phoning me back Geoff to see what the license actually allows. Great help ty

[posie]

..Hi Fudgey, surely the RSPCA should know about this, because MAYBE cruelty was involved....Worth a try...Posie..

[Eryri]

It may be worth noting that as the land owner (MoD) is responsible for the 'correct works' to be conducted in their land. The fact that a license was granted to the MoD means that they are responsible for works within the terms of the license. The fact that Scottish National Heritage told you to contact the police suggests that it was not SNH who granted the required license. This would mean that the MoD used the 'crown immunity' provision in the Protection of Badgers Act. The Secretary of State for Scotland (Michael Moore MP) who would have had to be consulted for the MoD to obtain a license by crown exemption. Why don't you ask him?

[FUDGEY]

Thanks to all its now in the hands of a Badger group who are pretty sure things have been done illegaly, Ill keep yous updated, ty again.

[posie]

Originally Posted by FUDGEY

Thanks to all its now in the hands of a Badger group who are pretty sure things have been done illegaly, Ill keep yous updated, ty again.

Well Done again FUDGEY....Posie