Further to your report about the snaring of mountain hares (Police to probe claims of snaring at Cawdor estate, April 21), new figures show that the incidents on this estate are only the tip of a very large iceberg as thousands of mountain hares have been snared in breach of a licensing regime designed to protect the species from indiscriminate traps.
A report by Scottish Natural Heritage (The Distribution of Mountain Hare in Scotland 2006/07) shows that of a total of 24,529 hares taken across 90 estates, 79% were shot, while 21% - a staggering 5078 animals - were snared. Figures were provided by the estates and gamekeepers who kill mountain hares for sport, tick control or to protect forestry.
Mountain hares are protected under UK and European conservation legislation and it is not permitted to use an indiscriminate means to take or kill them, except under licence. We understand that only three licences were issued in 2006, for a total of 190 hares. Both the government and SNH stopped issuing licences for snaring mountain hares in 2006, as the conservation status of the species could not be established. It appears, therefore, that almost 5000 mountain hares were snared in breach of the regulations.
This discrepancy between recorded, licensed capture and actual capture shows a disregard for, or ignorance of, the current law. The continued prevalence of snaring - whether deliberately or recklessly - on estates in Scotland contradicts claims that these devices can be responsibly and expertly used.
We have made our case against snares because they are inhumane and indiscriminate - now we also see how widely they have been misused, in apparent disregard for the law. The sorry story of the hares supports what we have been saying for years - that it is impossible to regulate snaring in our countryside. Regulation plans recently announced by the Minister for the Environment will not be effective. The only sure way to eradicate the suffering and end the threat to non-target animals is to ban snaring altogether.
Libby Anderson, Political Director, Advocates for Animals, 10 Queensferry Street, Edinburgh.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article