Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Snaring decision

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 25 February 2008
On 20 February, the Scottish Government announced its intention to allow snaring to continue. The decision contradicts overwhelming public support for a ban on these cruel and indiscriminate traps, and follows an official public consultation which revealed a majority of more than 2:1 in favour of a ban.
Instead of a ban the minister has proposed to attempt to regulate the practice through a package of technical measures. We do not believe such measures will stop the wide scale suffering or prevent the capture of non-target animals including protecte
d species.

The current regime already involves technical distinctions and voluntary codes of practice, but fails to prevent animal suffering. In our view, a ban on all snares will ultimately be the only way to address animal welfare and conservation concerns. In addition, cruelty – in whatever form it takes – whether inflicted on humans or animals, can never be regulated only abolished.

Snares have no place in 21st-century Scotland. The campaign to ban snaring in Scotland will continue until these primitive traps are finally prohibited.

ROSS MINETT
Advocates for Animals

LOUISE ROBERTSON
League Against Cruel Sports

RODNEY HALE
Hare Preservation Trust

ANDY CHRISTIE
Hessilhead Wildlife Rescue Trust

GRACE YOXON
International Otter Survival Fund

IAN HUTCHISON
Scottish Badgers
LES WARD
Marchig Animal Welfare Trust





Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 24 February 2008 8:35 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
 
1

Alternative (High Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 25/02/2008 18:43:51
"...overwhelming public support for a ban..."

Oh yeah? And how's that then? I don't recall a referendum being held on this issue---which is the only whay that you would determine if there was "overwhelming public support" for anything.

This is typical sound-byte nonsense from the anti-everything brigade. Come on then you lot who are so vocal about this kind of thing... How DO you control pests---in particular foxes---now that we have the hunting ban? Of course! You use snares don't you? Ok, so how do you control them without snares? Poison perhaps? That would be a really good idea and I don't think.

You lot need to mind your own business and stop sticking your noses in where they don't belong.

2

hogs4fun,

Borders 25/02/2008 22:22:18
When out walking it is not uncommon to come across snares or traps where it is obvious that the device has not been checked for some considerable time and the creature has died a painful lingering death from injuries or starvation. Snares are of course intended to tighten around the animal's neck and kill it almost immediately but often they do not snare the intended prey and catch other creatures including cats and often catch an animal by the body or by a leg with horrific results. The previous Police Wildlife Liason Officer in the Borders produced a frightening collection of hideous traps confiscated in the area during his work. He also had photos of the victims.
New arrivals to the country life see it through rose-tinted glasses at first but slowly the reality dawns! Having lived in the Borders for 30 years now and raised funds for local wildlife conservation and local animal welfare centres I have seen and heard terrible but true cases of the plight not only of the wildlife on some properties but the working animals too. Collies too old to work being left to starve in a shed and two others left up to their bellies in their own filth with urine scalds and other sores. Too old to work therefore not worth bothering about. In the first instance neighbours steeled themselves to talk to the farmer and eventually he SOLD them the old dog and in the second example another employee very bravely took on the task of looking after the two old dogs and improved their living conditions at their own expense - treading a fine line, not showing their anger at the situation, in order to keep contact with the dogs. A charity paid the vets bills. There are also many stories about the cruelty of keepers towards their dogs. One came to a rescue centre as it had been beaten up on many occasions and eventually neighbours could stand it no longer and called the vet and police. The keeper said "it wouldnae work" The poor wee spaniel had cancer and lived on in a caring home for a year
3

Angus,

Alexandria 26/02/2008 00:29:56
1 Alternative (High Octane) Fuel Head

If this is the type of moronic support we have for snaring then the case for banning them is entirely justified.
4

Alternative (High Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 26/02/2008 10:47:59
#3:

Whatever you think of me, it does not alter the fact that to ban snares would be stupid. In the same way that banning hunting was stupid.

According to your logic, you are going to to support doing something stupid just because you do not like the tone of someone who is against doing so.

And for your next trick?
5

Wifie from Skye,

Skye 26/02/2008 20:12:52
#2. If you come across snares that have dead animals in them then the owners of hte snares are acting in an illegal manner as snares must be checked once every 24 hours and any animal in them should be dispatched or released. I suggest if you find one of these snares again that you contact the police.

Snares are NOT intended to tighten around an animals neck and kill it immediately! Snares are meant to ensnare an animal and hold it there until the snare is checked. Snares must be able to run free and not tighten and strangle, they must act in the same way as a lead.

I am sorry that you have witnessed those incidents of animal cruelty however you are guilty of tarring everyone with the same brush. I once saw someone wearing a suit in a city spit at a beggar - does that mean that all people in cities wearing suits are cruel people that don't care about others and all spit at beggars?!

#1 and 3 - Well said!!
6

Wifie from Skye,

skye 26/02/2008 20:13:41
Sorry, I meant #1 and 4 - well said!!

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
RSS Feed of this article's comments
Delivery formats: RSS, Atom, Javascript & Email
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.