"BAC" wrote in message
...

"Alan Holmes" wrote in message
...

"BAC" wrote in message
...

"Jaques d'Alltrades" wrote in
message
k...
The message
from "BAC" contains these words:

You are advocating drowning, which does not appear to be advocated
by
the Forestry Commission in any of its currently applicable
documents
referring to grey squirrel control.

I think the most applicable may be
http://www.forestry.gov.uk/pdf/fcpn004.pdf/$FILE/fcpn004.pdf
specific to the control of grey squirrels in woodlands, which, in
respect of
live trapping, recommends that the squirrels be removed from the
trap
and
killed with a blow to the head from a blunt instrument, or taken to
a
vet
for humane destruction. It goes so far as to say no other form of
killing of
live trapped squirrels should be attempted (and that includes
shooting
them).

I'd recommend that the twerp who dreamt-up the blunt instrument
treatment should be given a squirrel and a blunt instrument, and
filmed.

And how much do they think a vet would charge per squirrel?

The advice is pure cloud-cuckooland, and worthy of the worst excesses
of
the so-called 'animal rights' lobby.

Well, that's the Forestry Commission for you (emphatically not an AR
organisation), the same organisation which Alan cited as authority for
drowning the animals, which is of course the main reason I've referred
to
them, since he's hoist on his own petard, so to speak.


I don't believe in allowing any animal to suffer just for the
convenience of mankind, but there are limits to altruism. If ever I
have
to dispatch a squirrel in a trap, it will be shot.

If I had a gun this may be the method I'd use, but I don't have a gun.

I bet you didn't have a trap before you went out and bought one, either.



Which would be OK by the RSPCA and also with Environmental Health at
some
Council websites I've seen. If you've read the Forestry Commission PDF
files
I've posted the links for, you'll have seen one reason they don't
recommend
shooting the squirrel in the trap is they're worried about a possible
ricochet causing human injury, so maybe it's 'Health and Safety' mania
at
the root of it. I also noticed they are worried about use of steel
pellets
in shooting in their woods because of the effect they can have on the
value
of timber.

Squirrels cause a great deal of damage other than to trees, they steal
things I grow for my own consumption, they kill birds by destroying the
eggs, they dig up plants, they break into peoples homes destroying
property, chewing through electricity cables putting human beings at
risk from electrocution and fire, both children and the elderly, as
well as all sorts of other problems.

But you wouldn't want to be bothered about things like that, would you?

Don't be silly. I have taken issue with the method of destruction of
trapped
squirrels you have been advocating. I have not argued that nobody ever has
any need to remove squirrels from their property. Not knowing the
circumstances in which you live, I have done you the courtesy of assuming
you have a genuine need to control squirrels, and are not simply killing
them as a result of some malign obsession.

I must admit it has become an obsession, that of trying to preserve the food
I'm ying to grow for my consumption.

It requires a little common sense.

I don't understand how you can ignore this destruction,

I am not ignoring 'this destruction', although I do not personally believe
it to be sufficient justification for a universal 'kill on sight' policy -
IMO it should be up to individual landowners to decide whether or not they
are prepared to tolerate the squirrels which visit their properties. What
I
have been saying is I believe that where someone decides there is a need
to
control squirrels or other mammals on his land, he should ensure that they
are despatched in a humane manner, and I don't believe that drowning is
the
most humane alternative.

Then, as I have asked before, please give me a precise method of despatching
the vermin without risk to myself and at to extra cost.

I suspect that taking each one to the vet for dispatching would not be
cheap,
and how would the vet carry out this proceedure.

"Alan Holmes" wrote in message
...

"BAC" wrote in message
...

"Alan Holmes" wrote in message
...
ups.com...
In what way is it illegal to kill vermin by drowning them? One of
the
best ways I would have thought. I believe it is illegal to drown
humans, but grey squirrels?

It was technically made illegal by virtue of the Wild Mammals
Protection
Act
1996 which included drowning amongst the list of abuses outlawed
from
30th
April 1997. I don't know whether the RSPCA has actually brought
charges
against anyone for drowning a wild mammal, though, or if they
have,
whether
the perpetrator was convicted.

It is the method recomended by the Forestry Commistion for the
disposal
of
this type of vermin.


Is it? Do you have a reference for that? Did you perhaps receive that
advice
prior to April 1997?

Please enlighten me, what happened on April 1997.

The Wild Mammals Protection Act 1996 came into force, as previously
stated.
I was speculating it might be possible, that, as a consequence of
deliberate
drowning being listed as an abuse, the FC may have amended its position
regarding despatch of grey squirrels by drowning.

I have asked the RSPCA whether, in their opinion, drowning of grey
squirrels
is a humane form of killing live trapped squirrels, and their response
was
that the squirrels should be despatched either by shooting or by a
lethal
blow to the head.

Did they say exactly how one would be able to restrain it to administer a
blow
to the head?

No, that advice was given by your old friends at the Forestry Commission, in
the PDF document I have posted the link to several times in this thread.


As to shooting it, it would still have to be made to be still, the traps
are
about 6 inches square and about two feet long, the squirrels can go from
end
to end at about three times a second, it would be very difficult to aim
the
gun at the squirrel to make a shot kill the thing, it is more likely that
it
would be wounded, so one would have to reload, and try again with the
distinct possiblity that it would be wounded again. This could well take
considerably longer that the ten seconds it takes to drown the thing, and
all this time it would be in great pain, how does that tie up with being
humane?


Up in the north west, where the conservation bodies are concerned about the
spread of grey squirrels into red squirrel territory, they will supply
householders with live traps (so any red squirrels caught may be released)
and they advise householders not to try and shoot the grey squirrels in the
cages themselves, but to contact the squirrel project people, who send round
an expert to kill the squirrel, either by shooting or by lethal injection.
So I'd imagine it is possible for people with the necessary skill and
experience.

"Alan Holmes" wrote in message
...

"BAC" wrote in message
...

"Chris Bacon" wrote in message
...
BAC wrote:
(In Apr, 1997)
The Wild Mammals Protection Act 1996 came into force, as previously
stated.
I was speculating it might be possible, that, as a consequence of
deliberate
drowning being listed as an abuse

It is not "listed as an abuse" - although it can be an abuse.

"BE IT ENACTED by the Queens' most Excellent Majesty, by and with the
advice
and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this
present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as
follows:-


Offences. 1. If, save as permitted by this Act, any person
mutilates,
kicks, beats, nails or otherwise impales, stabs, burns, stones, crushes,
drowns, drags or asphyxiates any wild mammal with intent to inflict
unnecessary suffering he shall be guilty of an offence."

It is, prima facie, an abuse, as listed under S1 unless covered by one
of
the exceptions.

One of those exceptions (s2b)
is the killing in a reasonably swift and humane way of a mammal taken in
the
course of lawful pest control activity.

So, the question seems to remain, is killing a captured squirrel by
drowning
'reasonably swift and humane',

Ten seconds!

Is that swift enough?

Drowning is not humane, in my opinion, FWIW, but maybe the courts would take
a different view. RSPCA told me they would arrange for the matter to be
investigated, if a complaint were made on their cruelty hotline, and I
suppose that would be the first step.

"Alan Holmes" wrote in message
...

"BAC" wrote in message
...

"Alan Holmes" wrote in message
...


snip

http://www.forestry.gov.uk/pdf/fcpn004.pdf/$FILE/fcpn004.pdf
specific to the control of grey squirrels in woodlands, which, in
respect
of
live trapping, recommends that the squirrels be removed from the trap
and
killed with a blow to the head from a blunt instrument, or taken to a
vet
for humane destruction. It goes so far as to say no other form of
killing
of
live trapped squirrels should be attempted (and that includes
shooting
them).

I have asked Alan to provide a reference for the 'drowning' advice he
claims
to have had from the FC, but none has yet been forthcoming. I suspect
any
such advice may turn out to have been superseded.

I am not going to put myself at risk in order to follow some idea put
by
people who have never had to deal with these pests.

That is the Forestry Commission you are talking about, the same
organisation
you previously claimed to be advocating drowning as a means of disposal.

If you are unwilling to put yourself at risk to do the job humanely,
perhaps
you should not be doing it at all?


In fact, I invite you do come round and deal with the next one I catch!


No, thanks, I have no wish to kill your grey squirrels. But I expect you
could find professional pest controllers in your area who would be
willing
to do the job properly, for a price, and at no risk to yourself.

Is it normal to pay someone to catch rats and mice?


Of course it is, if one is unable or unwilling to do the job effectively
oneself. Even Councils charge for the service, e.g.

http://www.rbwm.gov.uk/env_health/eh...ce_charges.htm

If you read that, you will see they charge for most services unless a person
is on benefits.

On Mon, 16 May 2005 10:23:49 +0100, "BAC"
wrote:

See

http://www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/rd...cal/TAN_34.pdf

which is the DEFRA Technical Advice Note for dealing with rat infestations.
From which I quote,

"Cage Traps
...
Any captured rats must be
humanely despatched, either by a single blow to the
head or by shooting. Drowning is not a humane
method of dispatch and could result in prosecution
under the Protection of Animals Act 1911."

Curious that they suggest shooting a rat in a cage as a suitable
method of dispatch for rats but advise against shooting in the cage
for squirrels!

JB

"Alan Holmes" wrote in message
...

"BAC" wrote in message
...


I follow a procedure which is laid down by a governmenr department
called
The Forestry Commission, if you have any problems with that
procedure
I
suggest instead of trying to slag people off here, you contact
them
and
put your concerns to them.

You are advocating drowning, which does not appear to be advocated
by
the Forestry Commission in any of its currently applicable
documents
referring to grey squirrel control.

What sensible/practical method do they now suggest is the way to
despatch
them?

If you have read the pdf document linked to my response to Kay's
message,
you will know the two methods recommended by the FC are either
administation
of a lethal blow to the head with a blunt instrument, or
transportation
to
a
vet for humane destruction. No mention of drowning, in fact they
recommend
that no means of destruction other than those I've just mentioned
should
be
attempted.

I cannot see how it is possible to get close enough to kill with a blow
to
the head.

As you must know, if you have read the FC advice, you, kitted out with
your
gauntlets, are somehow supposed to get the squirrel out of the trap into
a
hessian sack, and, once you have subdued it in the sack, are supposed to
work out where the head is and whack it with the 'blunt instrument'. If
you
find the advice impractical or incredible, I suggest you take it up with
the
FC.

I have no wish to cause myself considerable injury trying to get one of
these things out of the trap.

These things are lethal.


I don't blame them, they are merely trying to survive. Basically, your
attitude seems to be that you follow a method which is easy for you to do,
regardless of the suffering you inflict on your quarry.

"Alan Holmes" wrote in message
...

"BAC" wrote in message
...

"Jaques d'Alltrades" wrote in
message
k...
The message
from "BAC" contains these words:

You are advocating drowning, which does not appear to be advocated
by
the Forestry Commission in any of its currently applicable
documents
referring to grey squirrel control.

I think the most applicable may be
http://www.forestry.gov.uk/pdf/fcpn004.pdf/$FILE/fcpn004.pdf
specific to the control of grey squirrels in woodlands, which, in
respect of
live trapping, recommends that the squirrels be removed from the trap
and
killed with a blow to the head from a blunt instrument, or taken to a
vet
for humane destruction. It goes so far as to say no other form of
killing of
live trapped squirrels should be attempted (and that includes
shooting
them).

I'd recommend that the twerp who dreamt-up the blunt instrument
treatment should be given a squirrel and a blunt instrument, and
filmed.

And how much do they think a vet would charge per squirrel?

The advice is pure cloud-cuckooland, and worthy of the worst excesses
of
the so-called 'animal rights' lobby.

Well, that's the Forestry Commission for you (emphatically not an AR
organisation), the same organisation which Alan cited as authority for
drowning the animals, which is of course the main reason I've referred
to
them, since he's hoist on his own petard, so to speak.


I don't believe in allowing any animal to suffer just for the
convenience of mankind, but there are limits to altruism. If ever I
have
to dispatch a squirrel in a trap, it will be shot.

Which would be OK by the RSPCA and also with Environmental Health at
some
Council websites I've seen. If you've read the Forestry Commission PDF
files
I've posted the links for, you'll have seen one reason they don't
recommend
shooting the squirrel in the trap is they're worried about a possible
ricochet causing human injury, so maybe it's 'Health and Safety' mania
at
the root of it. I also noticed they are worried about use of steel
pellets
in shooting in their woods because of the effect they can have on the
value
of timber.

So can you give us a precise method of extracting this extreemly dangerous
vermin from the trap in order to shoot it?


Who is this 'us'? As far as I am aware, you are virtually alone in the
regular deliberate drowning of grey squirrels. Other people who trap grey
squirrels, presumably, manage to deal with them in a humane manner in spite
of your suggestion it is impossible to do so. I've already posted the
Forestry Commission Technical Advice Note which includes a description of
removing the squirrel for bashing over the head - not for shooting. FC do
not recommend shooting either in or out of the trap.

I'd imagine other people would shoot the creature in the trap.

If you were genuinely concerned about the practicalities of a more humane
form of disposal, you could contact the RSPCA, your friends at the FC, the
bloke who sold you the traps (to see whether he now offers different advice)
the advice line of your local council's pest control department, or DEFRA,
perhaps, for expert guidance.

"Alan Holmes" wrote in message
...

"BAC" wrote in message
...

"Alan Holmes" wrote in message
...

"BAC" wrote in message
...

"Jaques d'Alltrades" wrote in
message
k...
The message
from "BAC" contains these words:

You are advocating drowning, which does not appear to be
advocated
by
the Forestry Commission in any of its currently applicable
documents
referring to grey squirrel control.

I think the most applicable may be
http://www.forestry.gov.uk/pdf/fcpn004.pdf/$FILE/fcpn004.pdf
specific to the control of grey squirrels in woodlands, which, in
respect of
live trapping, recommends that the squirrels be removed from the
trap
and
killed with a blow to the head from a blunt instrument, or taken
to
a
vet
for humane destruction. It goes so far as to say no other form of
killing of
live trapped squirrels should be attempted (and that includes
shooting
them).

I'd recommend that the twerp who dreamt-up the blunt instrument
treatment should be given a squirrel and a blunt instrument, and
filmed.

And how much do they think a vet would charge per squirrel?

The advice is pure cloud-cuckooland, and worthy of the worst
excesses
of
the so-called 'animal rights' lobby.

Well, that's the Forestry Commission for you (emphatically not an AR
organisation), the same organisation which Alan cited as authority
for
drowning the animals, which is of course the main reason I've
referred
to
them, since he's hoist on his own petard, so to speak.


I don't believe in allowing any animal to suffer just for the
convenience of mankind, but there are limits to altruism. If ever I
have
to dispatch a squirrel in a trap, it will be shot.

If I had a gun this may be the method I'd use, but I don't have a gun.

I bet you didn't have a trap before you went out and bought one, either.



Which would be OK by the RSPCA and also with Environmental Health at
some
Council websites I've seen. If you've read the Forestry Commission
PDF
files
I've posted the links for, you'll have seen one reason they don't
recommend
shooting the squirrel in the trap is they're worried about a possible
ricochet causing human injury, so maybe it's 'Health and Safety'
mania
at
the root of it. I also noticed they are worried about use of steel
pellets
in shooting in their woods because of the effect they can have on the
value
of timber.

Squirrels cause a great deal of damage other than to trees, they steal
things I grow for my own consumption, they kill birds by destroying the
eggs, they dig up plants, they break into peoples homes destroying
property, chewing through electricity cables putting human beings at
risk from electrocution and fire, both children and the elderly, as
well as all sorts of other problems.

But you wouldn't want to be bothered about things like that, would you?

Don't be silly. I have taken issue with the method of destruction of
trapped
squirrels you have been advocating. I have not argued that nobody ever
has
any need to remove squirrels from their property. Not knowing the
circumstances in which you live, I have done you the courtesy of
assuming
you have a genuine need to control squirrels, and are not simply killing
them as a result of some malign obsession.

I must admit it has become an obsession, that of trying to preserve the
food
I'm ying to grow for my consumption.

And, although you have carried out this control for fifteen to twenty years,
you are still over-run by grey squirrels?


It requires a little common sense.

I don't understand how you can ignore this destruction,

I am not ignoring 'this destruction', although I do not personally
believe
it to be sufficient justification for a universal 'kill on sight'
policy -
IMO it should be up to individual landowners to decide whether or not
they
are prepared to tolerate the squirrels which visit their properties.
What
I
have been saying is I believe that where someone decides there is a need
to
control squirrels or other mammals on his land, he should ensure that
they
are despatched in a humane manner, and I don't believe that drowning is
the
most humane alternative.

Then, as I have asked before, please give me a precise method of
despatching
the vermin without risk to myself and at to extra cost.

There is no way of killing the creatures without risk to yourself - at the
moment, for instance, you may be risking prosecution every time you do it.
DEFRA's advice on disposing of live trapped rats is that drowning is an
unacceptable inhumane method which brings the risk of prosecution, so I
don't see why it should be any different with squirrels. RSPCA would
certainly investigate if a complaint were to be made via their cruelty
hotline, although I have no idea whether they would actually prosecute..

If you were to master the art of getting the animal into a sack and bashing
it over the head whilst it is in the sack, as described by the Forestry
Commission, it would only cost you the price of a sack and a cudgel and a
pair of suitable gauntlets. Buying a gun and learning how to use it would
cost more, of course. Arranging to visit and perhaps observe experts in
action would cost you some time, I suppose.


I suspect that taking each one to the vet for dispatching would not be
cheap,
and how would the vet carry out this proceedure.


No, it would not be cheap, but it would be humane. I suspect the vet's
practice would euthanise the creature, probably using a lethal injection
administered by a veterinary nurse.

"JB" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 16 May 2005 10:23:49 +0100, "BAC"
wrote:

See

http://www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/rd...cal/TAN_34.pdf

which is the DEFRA Technical Advice Note for dealing with rat
infestations.
From which I quote,

"Cage Traps
...
Any captured rats must be
humanely despatched, either by a single blow to the
head or by shooting. Drowning is not a humane
method of dispatch and could result in prosecution
under the Protection of Animals Act 1911."

Curious that they suggest shooting a rat in a cage as a suitable
method of dispatch for rats but advise against shooting in the cage
for squirrels!


It's two different 'they's. The Forestry Commission (which Alan claims
originally recommended drowning captured squirrels) advice on grey squirrels
which I posted in this thread is currently NOT to shoot trapped animals
(because of perceived risk of injury from a ricochet) and to use no methods
other than bashing over the head or lethal injection, whereas the DEFRA
advice note I also posted, concerning rats, didn't exclude shooting the
trapped ones, although it did exclude drowning which it said brought the
risk of prosecution.

Although the two organisations may have a difference of opinion about the
safety of shooting, they don't seem to disagree regarding the
unacceptability of drowning.

BAC wrote:
Who is this 'us'? As far as I am aware, you are virtually alone in the
regular deliberate drowning of grey squirrels. Other people who trap grey
squirrels, presumably, manage to deal with them in a humane manner in spite
of your suggestion it is impossible to do so.

What then is your opinion of using a Fenn trap, as opposed to a live
trap and drowning?

"Chris Bacon" wrote in message
...
BAC wrote:
Who is this 'us'? As far as I am aware, you are virtually alone in the
regular deliberate drowning of grey squirrels. Other people who trap
grey
squirrels, presumably, manage to deal with them in a humane manner in
spite
of your suggestion it is impossible to do so.

What then is your opinion of using a Fenn trap, as opposed to a live
trap and drowning?

That's not a fair question, since using a live trap and drowning is not a
valid option, nor would it be the only option, IMO. A Mk IV or Mk VI would
at least be legal, if appropriately sited and checked, and if no danger of
Reds in the area, but my personal inclination if I *had* to trap and kill a
squirrel, would be to catch it live and then dispatch it humanely (not by
drowning, which is inhumane, blimey, it's not even recommended for mink).

BAC wrote:
"Chris Bacon" wrote in message...
What then is your opinion of using a Fenn trap, as opposed to a live
trap and drowning?


That's not a fair question,since using a live trap and drowning is not a
valid option,

It is a *different* question - knowing both methods I'd be interested
in an opinion. Anyone (of the people reading this thread)?

On Tue, 17 May 2005 10:34:35 +0100, "BAC"
wrote:

"Alan Holmes" wrote in message
...
I suspect that taking each one to the vet for dispatching would not be
cheap,
and how would the vet carry out this proceedure.

No, it would not be cheap, but it would be humane. I suspect the vet's
practice would euthanise the creature, probably using a lethal injection
administered by a veterinary nurse.

Of course one could argue that there's more cruelty inflicted by
keeping a pest in a cage for an extended time and then taking it into
an alien environment in order to administer a lethal injection than by
just bashing it over the head, shooting it or drowning it.

JB

On Tue, 17 May 2005 14:14:58 +0100, JB
wrote:

On Tue, 17 May 2005 10:34:35 +0100, "BAC"
wrote:

"Alan Holmes" wrote in message
...
I suspect that taking each one to the vet for dispatching would not be
cheap,
and how would the vet carry out this proceedure.

No, it would not be cheap, but it would be humane. I suspect the vet's
practice would euthanise the creature, probably using a lethal injection
administered by a veterinary nurse.

Of course one could argue that there's more cruelty inflicted by
keeping a pest in a cage for an extended time and then taking it into
an alien environment in order to administer a lethal injection than by
just bashing it over the head, shooting it or drowning it.

JB

Apologies for following up my own posting but before anyone reads that
and berates me for advocating drowning / shooting etc I'm not
condoning or condemning any method just trying to be complete in the
list of methods that have been suggested and pose the question about
the relative cruely of lethal injections.

JB

"JB" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 17 May 2005 10:34:35 +0100, "BAC"
wrote:

"Alan Holmes" wrote in message
...
I suspect that taking each one to the vet for dispatching would not be
cheap,
and how would the vet carry out this proceedure.

No, it would not be cheap, but it would be humane. I suspect the vet's
practice would euthanise the creature, probably using a lethal injection
administered by a veterinary nurse.

Of course one could argue that there's more cruelty inflicted by
keeping a pest in a cage for an extended time and then taking it into
an alien environment in order to administer a lethal injection than by
just bashing it over the head, shooting it or drowning it.


One could argue that, although I wouldn't accept the implied equality
between bashing, shooting, or drowning as a means of dispatch.