Call for views – Wildlife Management and Muirburn (Scotland) Bill

A red grouse

Scotland’s Rural Affairs and Islands Committee has issued a ‘call for views’ on the Wildlife Management and Muirburn (Scotland) Bill. BASC has raised significant concerns with the Bill, which was published on 22 March 2023. .

The Wildlife Management and Muirburn (Scotland) Bill aims to alter legislation around how people can capture and kill certain wild birds (red grouse) and proposes changes around the making of muirburn (the controlled burning of heather and other plants for land management purposes).

The Bill has two distinct parts. Part one makes a number of provisions in relation wildlife management. This includes a ban on the use and purchase of glue traps, the establishment of a licensing system for the use of certain wildlife traps and creates a licensing system for land on which specific birds may be killed or taken.

Part two of the Bill regulates the making of muirburn by extending its licensing system. It now requires a muirburn licence at all times of the year and on any land on which muirburn is to be made.

It is vital that you respond to this ‘call for views’ survey, as this will shape the decision-making of MSPs on the Rural Affairs and Islands Committee, when it comes to scrutinising the Bill at Stages 1 and 2.

The survey closes on 5 May, you’ll find a link to respond at the bottom of this page.

BASC guide on responding to the survey

Glue traps

Q1. Do you agree with the proposed ban on the use, possession and purchase of glue traps (sections 1-3)?
Answer: Complete as you wish.

Wildlife traps

Q2. Do you agree there is a need for additional regulation of the use of certain wildlife traps?
Answer: No.

Additional points to include:

  1. There is no need for additional training and accreditation for trap operators but there is an industry recognition that there is inconsistency in current legislation with respect to trapping and snaring.
  2. All snare operators require to be trained and accredited already. All those using live capture traps for birds (Larsen traps and crow cage traps) need to be registered.
  3. All those who currently operate snares and live capture traps would welcome a single identification number.
  4. BASC notes that recently approved spring traps (added to relevant STAOs) which meet agreement on International Humane Trapping Standards (AIHTS) for stoats (as such these are the most commonly used traps on grouse moors) meet strict efficacy standards, which largely result from their design as opposed to needing operator expertise (beyond following the manufacturer’s instructions).

Q3. Do you agree with the proposed licensing system for the use of certain wildlife traps (sections 4-5)?
Answer: No.

Additional points to include:

  1. There are potentially serious and unintended consequences as a result of the introduction of requirements for compulsory training and registration for all trap use.
  2. There is a recognition that many people may only use one type of trap, such as a Larsen traps, so training and accreditation would be complicated and have to be designed and delivered to cover an individual’s needs rather than all eventualities.
  3. This licensing proposal places additional financial burdens on the shooting sector through additional fees.
    A red grouse

    Licensing scheme for land used to shoot red grouse

    Q4. Do you agree there is a need for additional regulation of land to be used to shoot red grouse?
    Answer: No.

    Additional points to include:

    1. Wildlife crime in Scotland is already penalised by criminal law, as well as NatureScot’s ability to revoke general licences.
    2. Attempting to link wildlife crimes to grouse moor management would be disproportionate and illogical.
    3. The current provisions and penalties under various pieces of legislation act as robust deterrents against wildlife crime.

    Q5. Do you agree with the proposed licensing system for land to be used to shoot red grouse (sections 6-7)?
    Answer: No.

    Additional points to include:

    1. The right to shoot grouse in inherent to landownership which is protected under the European Convention of Human Rights and BASC believes that unnecessary and disproportionate restrictions, such as the proposed licencing scheme, infringes on guarantees under the ECHR.
    2. A licence suspension based on an investigation alone, which could in addition prevent a future licence application, even though the person in question could be innocent, is unacceptable.
    3. The civil burden of proof is unacceptable for the Scottish Government’s proposals.
    4. Birds being added to Part 1B through secondary legislation is unacceptable, as effectively any bird species could be added without effective parliamentary scrutiny and without the degree of consultation that has already centred around red grouse.
    5. The renewal or granting of a licence for one year is unworkable, due to unforgiving timescales. Grouse moor management relies on front-loaded investment including employment of staff.
    6. The list of ‘relevant offences’ in section 16AA(11) goes beyond the initial scope of the Werritty Review.
    7. Losing the right to shoot grouse not only results in the immediate financial loss for the licence holder, but it has far-reaching consequences, such as loss of rural employment.
    8. Given the severity of the consequences, licences should only be suspended if a licence holder was successfully prosecuted.
      A controlled burn

      Additional powers to investigate wildlife crime

      Q6. Do you agree with the proposal to give the Scottish SPCA additional powers to investigate wildlife crime (section 8)?
      Answer: No.

      Additional points to include:

      1. • The Scottish SPCA already has substantial powers at its disposal.
      2. There are concerns about the SSPCA’s capacity to be impartial, and such powers should be retained by statutory bodies – not charities.

      Licensing scheme for muirburn
      Q7. Do you agree there is a need for additional regulation for muirburn?
      Answer: No.

      Additional points to include:

      1. Burning vegetation in the uplands (muirburn) is an essential tool for grouse moor management, management for livestock grazing and in wildfire management and mitigation. Whilst it can increase biodiversity and carbon sequestration, we recognise that the appropriate management is ultimately site-dependent.
      2. The Scottish Government recognises the importance of muirburn in preventing, reducing, and tackling wildfires.

      Q8. Do you agree with the proposed licensing system for muirburn (sections 9-19)?
      Answer: No.

      Additional points to include:

      1. The usage of the ‘40cm’ arbitrary peatland depth figure lacks scientific reasoning since peatland itself is not burned during muirburn.
      2. It would be unfeasible and impractical for land managers to be expected to measure peat depth across their land as part of a licensing regime, in order to establish the depth of peatland to determine whether burning could take place.
      3. The powers to suspend or revoke a muirburn licence under the civil burden of proof is unacceptable.

      Click here to complete the consultation

      Share

      Powered by  GDPR Cookie Compliance
      Privacy Overview

      This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.