Snaring decision must be evidence-based

's avatar

19 January 2011
speech bubble Comment (1)

Our thanks to all our supporters who wrote to their MSPs, asking them to attend last week’s briefing in the Scottish Parliament on the problems of snaring in Scotland.

Fox cub caught in snare

Your efforts helped to ensure a great turnout and an interested audience.

It seems increasingly clear that many individual MSPs dislike the idea of snares, but are swayed by the much-repeated argument from the gamekeepers and shooting interests that these traps are indispensable somehow vital to the continued health of the Scottish rural economy. 

The Minister for Environment, Roseanna Cunningham MSP, said last week:

“I do not believe that anyone who has looked closely at the issue believes that snaring is something to actively like or enjoy, but many people will conclude that it nevertheless remains a necessary part of a land manager's toolkit.”

Questions from MSPs at the briefing reflected similar perceptions. Members appeared moved by the shocking evidence of animal suffering caused by snares, presented by veterinary pathologist Professor Ranald Munro.

They were surprised, too, at the number of snares found by Bill Oddie in our new film Snares Uncovered. On the other hand, they had been told by the Scottish Gamekeepers Association that we intended to “sensationalise” snaring.

So when MSPs talk of striking a balance, it is not because they like the idea of snaring, but because of these constantly repeated assertions that there is no effective alternative; and that, without snaring, the countryside will somehow grind to a halt. 

They wanted to hear a debate when all the arguments would be put on both sides, so we have arranged a follow-up meeting through the Cross Party Group on Animal Welfare, which will take place on 8 February.

Where predator control is genuinely required, there can be a variety of approaches ranging from more humane traps or shooting (neither of which we support, but both are to be preferred to the use of snares), to novel solutions such as the introduction of llamas to sheep flocks for protection. You can see a whole chapter on alternatives in the OneKind Report on Snaring.

Figures have been produced for some of the economic impact of foxes on farming – you can read more about this in the chapter by Professor Stephen Harris of Bristol University in the OneKind Report on Snaring.  

The bigger picture is that the direct economic cost of fox predation to British agriculture amounts to approximately £12 million per annum.  But since the bulk of fox diet is made up of rabbits, which cause approximately £115 to £820 million damage to UK agriculture each year, fox predation also brings significant indirect economic benefits to farmers - potentially three to four times as much as any adverse impact through livestock predation. 

And as we have shown, there are other methods of protecting livestock, particularly in farming. Nothing is perfect, but if we are to talk of “keeping the countryside viable”, we need to factor all of this in.

MSPs must demand more evidence to justify the retention of something that 77% of people in Scotland believe should be banned. Otherwise they may vote to retain this indiscriminate trap that causes so much fear and pain and reduces sentient animals to static despair before death, all on the basis of sincerely-made, but un-evidenced assertions.

comments powered by Disqus

Saving Scotland's Foxes with Hessilhead