Releasing caught pests?

[Holdaway 2]

I haven't read all of this topic but I'm gonna jump in anyway.

 

Transportation of livestock requires a license, do captured animals become 'livestock'? There are other restrictions around the transportation of 'wildlife'.

 

Another thing to consider is this. If a certain type of animal is not present on a piece of land but is present on all surrounding sides, and its absence is not due to human interference, then surely the common sense thinking would be that the land cannot (for whatever reason) support that animal species.

If you take that argument further, then surely introducing a species into an environment where it cannot naturally survive must be construed as imposing unnecessary suffering and cruelty?

 

Just thought I'd add a few more sparks...

 

H

[Guest jbswildlife]

the law states you are obliged to control rabbits on your land, and it is an offence to give someone a pest problem by release of rabbits

[stubby 175]

and it is an offence to give someone a pest problem by release of rabbits

 

where does it state that

[Guest jbswildlife]

and it is an offence to give someone a pest problem by release of rabbits

 

where does it state that

http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/publicati...ife/WML-GO2.pdf

[stubby 175]

that only states the need to control rabbits on your land, and prevent them from going onto others,

 

it does not state that its illegal to release rabbits onto other land with landowners permission

[john b 38]

that only states the need to control rabbits on your land, and prevent them from going onto others,

 

it does not state that its illegal to release rabbits onto other land with landowners permission

 

I know that this has run and run (and Matt will be jumping back in I'm sure) but you have to admit Stubby releasing your rabbits onto new ground has to be a contravention of the spirit of "prevent them from going onto others,". And if you're catching the rabbits with permission then your acting for the landowner to they are 'your rabbits'. If your not then you're poaching anyway.

 

Interesting question though - if you have permission at both are you just moving them 'within your land'.

 

What we need on this is some case law.

[Matt 160]

I know that this has run and run (and Matt will be jumping back in I'm sure) but you have to admit Stubby releasing your rabbits onto new ground has to be a contravention of the spirit of "prevent them from going onto others,".

 

 

Well Mr B, you are right again.... I just can't help myself!

 

Lets get things into perspective here. The law in question was passed at a time when Great Britain was starving, and our huge rabbit population was costing us dearly in terms of crop production.

 

The problem at that time was that you could have a number of landowners who kept rabbit numbers in check (by forming a 'Clearance Society' for instance) who had to witness their hard work go down the pan because there were pockets of rabbits which were left to re-infest the surrounding land, or simply travel onto it to feed. Railway lines are a classic example of this.

 

The other issue of the day was the fact that rabbits were being 'farmed' in enclosed warrens for both meat and fur. To outlaw the release of healthy rabbits into these warrens (to introduce fresh blood) would have accelerated the end of that industry, and no sane politician (I believe they were marginally more sane in those days) would have allowed such a law to be passed. Lets not forget that train loads of bunny meat was sent to London on a regular basis.

 

The law which is being quoted does NOT state that healthy rabbits may not be released. The 'spirit' of the law is not really relevant. The only prosecution I know of related to a railway line. The law did not make any allowance for the prosecution of a 'rabbit releaser'.

 

Lets just stop and think for a minute.... can anyone realistically see that it would be in the public interest to prosecute someone for reintroducing a much loved (yum, yum) mammal which is prevalant in most parts of the country?

 

Now can anyone here show us catagorically where any law states it is an offence to release healthy rabbits?

 

I wont hold my breath....

[Guest jbswildlife]

going to agree with matt on this one. have phoned every c**t and there dog and no-one has a clue. if you can prove your not spreading diesase, causing damage, and transport fits in with the correct bill then i dont think you can be done for it. but if they try blame your granny, this way they will not go forward due to public interest that would follow.

Can the law not state in one act what can be done.

 

example. had a job shooting seagulls. lesser black back. totally legal until i heard of the rspb trying to take two guys to court under the cruilty act, as the chicks on the roof would end up starving. to many ways to catch you out if you ask me

[moley 115]

I cant see how rabbits are pests unless there are loads of them in an area. Wouldnt it be worse if there was no rabbits left to hunt which will probably happen the way things are going. Ye are all worried about the law on this forum but how could someone prove your rabbits didnt just escape and you didnt release them. Look at my topic CAPTIVE RABBIT BREEDING PROGRAMME under the CONSERVATION AND GAMEKEEPING section. Us hunters know a lot more about our quarry than the government so its us that should regulate numbers.

 

you need to re-read your statement , it takes only 1 pest in the wrong place to cause massive problems , rabbits will never be totally wiped out , folk have bin trying for generations to rid the country of rabbits, rats and other assorted vermin