Snaring Laws

[Rhianlouise 0]

Hi Guys i have been trying to find what the snaring laws are in UK.

 

I have searched lots of web sites but some of them are in 2000 just want to know if anyone has a link to the law that is used today about snaring.

[Guest ferret feller]

just ask any questions on hear mate tons and tons of informative people

[peeps_76 17]

go to DEFRA website. its not the law but codes of best practice. there will be links here somewhere you have to look or use the search option at the top of the page. the guys on this site are very knowledgeable and very helpfull!

 

regards P

[Quixote 9]

Here you go................

 

http://www.defra.gov.uk/wildlife-countrysi.../snares-cop.pdf

[ellir0305 9]

Here you go................

 

http://www.defra.gov.uk/wildlife-countrysi.../snares-cop.pdf

 

just dont set your snares the ways thatr site says, read GS waters pinned articles at the top. the mutts nutts get some good snares and your away

[Quixote 9]

just dont set your snares the ways thatr site says

 

Aye..........best ignore all the info' provided by a body that's spent hundreds of thousands researching best practices nationwide & do it your own way

[trapperman 474]

just dont set your snares the ways thatr site says

 

Aye..........best ignore all the info' provided by a body that's spent hundreds of thousands researching best practices nationwide & do it your own way

ow no here we go

[trapperman 474]

is it safe to come out from under the table yet :search:

[Meriln2008 0]

Here you go................

 

http://www.defra.gov.uk/wildlife-countrysi.../snares-cop.pdf

 

just dont set your snares the ways thatr site says, read GS waters pinned articles at the top. the mutts nutts get some good snares and your away

 

 

I agree.The DEFRA sheet is more of a guide than 'The Law'.

Definately read G.S.Waters piece,It doubled my productivity.

Other than that I'd just say use common sense.Make sure you've got permissions.Andregularly check traps and snares.

 

 

 

 

 

>>>>> :sick:

[ellir0305 9]

just dont set your snares the ways thatr site says

 

Aye..........best ignore all the info' provided by a body that's spent hundreds of thousands researching best practices nationwide & do it your own way

 

 

eer well strangly yes and i doubt they spent that tbh the speel they give is the same as every camping and boyscout book has been for decades, WRONG! GS waters , woodga, P&G... etc those are the guys that do it for a living and have caught more rabbits than you or i could ever dream of mate, take a lesson in humility and listen to the pros.

 

and trapperman i would stay under the table for a bit longer but thats my rant over for now

[Quixote 9]

take a lesson in humility and listen to the pros.

 

I am a pro, sonny

 

But yes, I'll grant you...........perhaps hundreds of thousands is a tad on the high side

Edited April 9, 2009 by Quixote

[OldTrapCollector 377]

Normally I don't post into such debates but I feel that it is necessary in this case

 

DEFRA have no 'professional' rabbit catchers on their staff, in their research labs, or in their press department. How they can dictate the efficiency of a snare or trap is way beyond the realms of common logic. Perhaps like common business practises, they have swayed to public opinion or for those prepared to line their pockets as so often happens in Governed sub-departments?

 

The fact that certain traps are still on the Humane (?) Traps approval order as legal for use in the UK against pest species, where others are not even considered is ludicrous. I am talking about the Payne trap (ever seen one??), Fenn Mk I and II (if you are considering using these museum relics then I would dearly love to swap them for a new shiny Fenn Mk 4 or two), the Fenn Mk III (not produced since the late 1960's - most of these are almost incapable of firing properly due to the rust on them, and weak springs, and certainly not capable of killing a great deal). Lloyd trap (very few produced and certainly not used). The Aldrich snare (only to those licensed and only to catch big non indiginous mammals that the Ministry won't actually admit exist in the wild)

 

Shall I go on???

 

BASC and GCT might 'think' they have got experienced staff, but if those same folks are those responsible for making half hundredweight mink rafts, giant Larsen traps, and recently a spate of 'newly invented' break away fox snares at astronomical prices, then I really think they are wrong.

 

Listen to common sense. Listen to those rabbit catchers that regularly take many thousands of rabbits every season, and have done for decades. Do you think that they haven't tried every permutation of trap and snare to make their life easier, cheaper or more efficient or more humane over their many combined years?

 

Or would you rather follow the party line and keep to the 'directives' and glossy booklets that these suited bigots push out??

 

I know what I would choose

 

OTC

[Holdaway 2]

Normally I don't post into such debates but I feel that it is necessary in this case

 

DEFRA have no 'professional' rabbit catchers on their staff, in their research labs, or in their press department. How they can dictate the efficiency of a snare or trap is way beyond the realms of common logic. Perhaps like common business practises, they have swayed to public opinion or for those prepared to line their pockets as so often happens in Governed sub-departments?

 

The fact that certain traps are still on the Humane (?) Traps approval order as legal for use in the UK against pest species, where others are not even considered is ludicrous. I am talking about the Payne trap (ever seen one??), Fenn Mk I and II (if you are considering using these museum relics then I would dearly love to swap them for a new shiny Fenn Mk 4 or two), the Fenn Mk III (not produced since the late 1960's - most of these are almost incapable of firing properly due to the rust on them, and weak springs, and certainly not capable of killing a great deal). Lloyd trap (very few produced and certainly not used). The Aldrich snare (only to those licensed and only to catch big non indiginous mammals that the Ministry won't actually admit exist in the wild)

 

Shall I go on???

 

BASC and GCT might 'think' they have got experienced staff, but if those same folks are those responsible for making half hundredweight mink rafts, giant Larsen traps, and recently a spate of 'newly invented' break away fox snares at astronomical prices, then I really think they are wrong.

 

Listen to common sense. Listen to those rabbit catchers that regularly take many thousands of rabbits every season, and have done for decades. Do you think that they haven't tried every permutation of trap and snare to make their life easier, cheaper or more efficient or more humane over their many combined years?

 

Or would you rather follow the party line and keep to the 'directives' and glossy booklets that these suited bigots push out??

 

I know what I would choose

 

OTC

 

OTC, how could you!

 

Very well put mate.

 

[120-2 8]

In agree with OTC the DEFRA code or practice comes from the GWCT they are the ones that are testing snares and advicing DEFRA. Even new traps sent to the CSL for testing and approval for spring traps order are not field tested, they are only compared to the standards of what is already approved.

 

I remember many years ago when I was keepering in North Devon we had Glens rocking eye snare come from the GCT for us to test and what a great snare it was to, and again now the GWCT have sent out breakaway snares to keepers to test when all they need to do is consult the people that have been using them for years in the UK - myself included.

 

120-2

[OldTrapCollector 377]

Even new traps sent to the CSL for testing and approval for spring traps order are not field tested, they are only compared to the standards of what is already approved.

 

If this is the case then surely anything with jaws, spring and a trigger device should pass through based on what they have to compare them to.

 

The original replacements for the gin trap banned back in 1958 were tested to the extreme. Their development and approval was an expensive and drawn out procedure. Only the very best of many hundreds of traps submitted were passed through, and then they were the very best that could be engineered AT THAT TIME.

 

Surely modern materials, knowledge and engineering have stepped up a little since the 1950's??

 

I know that there are traps currently being 'considered' for approval (whatever that means), and others planned for 'consideration' in the near future.

 

What CSL/DEFRA/GWCT etc need to consider are the new Euro directives, that are derived from the stringent Canadian directives for humaneness and killing capability. There will lie the answer to the problem. If the trap is convenient, cheap, effective and can kill quickly then surely they should be the ones that should be adopted?

 

What happened to those newly approved DOC traps from New Zealand? They were approved and listed on the latest AO amendment but are still 'undergoing trials' ... explain that!!

 

OTC