| Register |
![]() |
|
|
Be the first to know Scotland's latest rural news. Register Now for our FREE Rural Update service. |
|
Information
News
Britain’s predators – how do we really feel?
By Peter Cairns
Predators mean different things to different people. For some, they are key to the ecological integrity of our countryside. For others, they are an inconvenience and a financial drain on rural businesses. Love them or loathe them, few of us remain indifferent to predators and their need to kill to survive.
Species like foxes, hen harriers and even wolves, have become political pawns between different socio-economic or special interest groups, each feeding selective information to the public which best serves their agenda.
Managing predators in Britain today is really about managing people's perceptions - what we believe, what we value and how we interact with nature.
So how do we really feel about Britain's predators and how are those feelings influenced by culture, myth and economics? Can the shooting of seals to protect fish farm interests ever be justified? Is the culling of foxes worthwhile and can it be sustained? Should public money be spent on returning wolves and lynx to our wild areas? These questions are perhaps more relevant to rural Scotland than anywhere else in the country.
Tooth and Claw is an innovative new media initiative which explores some of these issues and challenges entrenched thinking and ill-informed ideas. Tooth & Claw does not advocate for any particular agenda but provides a meeting place for anecdotal evidence and scientific fact.
The recently launched web site at http://www.toothandclaw.org.uk/ is the foundation for the project which, over the coming years, is set to be the most far-reaching survey of its kind in Britain. Wide participation is vital and everyone with an interest in how our countryside is managed is encouraged to take part.
Peter Cairns, project founder, says:
"The time is right to build bridges between conflicting interest groups and this can only emerge through dialogue, a better understanding of our wild predators and a stronger empathy with communities whose lives are affected by their presence."
Tooth and Claw ultimately asks questions of our own place in nature: as the most powerful predator of all.
- Source
- Rural Gateway Correspondent
- Date
- 6-Jun-2006
- Categories
- COUNTRYSIDE, All Scotland, News - General
13-Jun-2006 @ 21:04PM
Paul Lounds
No, no, no. Karl Pipes has got it all wrong – his is an emotional, knee-jerk, ill-thought-through reaction. The problem of introduced species playing havoc with indigenous populations eg mink killing water vole, grey squirrel out-competing red squirrel and also the problem of pets, especially cats, decimating wild bird and small mammal populations is very worrying and needs to be tackled. But not by culling; natural predation is the best answer together with humane capture and prevention of breeding.
If some predators are causing problems on nature reserves then they too should be captured, humanely trapped and prevented from breeding locally; no killing is necessary. But I do not see that an indigenous natural predator population would even cause a problem on a nature reserve, by preying on its natural prey. The ecological balance would be very beneficial to a nature reserve and culling predators to any level lower than its natural balanced population, would lead to an increase in herbivore numbers and the consequent troubles – such as too many deer – a problem that could be solved by introducing predators to begin with! In addition, not that I approve of game sporting activities and bird shooting, but if artificially-high numbers of game and birds are required then this should be achieved by captive, well-managed, breeding programs not by culling wild predators.
The only UK species that are naturally capable of coping with being hunted by packs or groups of carnivores are the deer and European bison, if re-introduced. These have evolved and have been naturally selected to exist in such a niche. All other species – mink, foxes, badgers, etc suffer too much unnatural stress and it is cruel to engage then in pursuit. Not that I am in favour of people hunting with horses and / or hounds, but if deer numbers are to be limited, and I agree they need to be in certain areas, because of the damage they do to the natural flora, then it is by natural predation – wolves and bears – that is by far the most efficacious method. They are biologically adapted to tolerate it as a species, as individuals and as herds. They are not used to being chased unnaturally, by horses, humans and dogs.
If the deer are in areas where wolves and bear could not be ie too near built-up human populations, then the deer would need to be culled as humanely as possible – stunned and then killed quickly whilst unconscious, as cattle are. Any unnecessary cruelty to any animal is out of the question.
Wind farms that kill eagles should not be fined. Instead, research should be undertaken to ensure that the blades should be easier to spot, for birds and they could then avoid them. A minor adjustment in colour, visibility, sound etc I’m sure could be achieved, so that they are not dangerous any more to wild birds. Wind farms should be given huge tax incentives to encourage green electricity.
8-Jun-2006 @ 17:17PM
Karl Pipes
Culling of mink and foxes using packs of hounds should be allowed. Predators causing problems on wildlife reserves and game sporting areas should be culled to low levels. Wind-farms that kill eagles should be heavily fined by increasing penalties on their Renewables Obligation Certificate payments.

Paul Lounds
23-Jun-2006 @ 18:18PM
Karl Pipes
I thought the object of this exercise was to extract the best ideas for predator management.
Keepered Grouse moors are noted for the highest breeding return of waders. Keepered farmland the best small bird survival returns. Traditional fox-hunt country the healthiest fox populations. Fines on wind-farms would help encourage best practice on avoiding bird-strike.
Natural levels of predation do not always encourage a good population of either prey or predator. In fact the imposition of such practice can wipe out a healthy environment on places such as grouse-moors. For some excellent reading on the subject I recommend Stephen Tapper's 'Nature's Gain', a report from the Game Conservancy Trust, 2005.
Could Mr Lounds tell us how he plans to stun deer "humanely" before he kills them? Surely, a simple rifle shot is much easier? As for wolves and bears, the former are primitive hounds and I've met the latter at night, he is welcome to them!