LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #11   Report Post  
Old 14-05-2005, 10:28 PM
Alan Holmes
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"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.


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?

It requires a little common sense.

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






 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Apologies for "Mad" Bill Pal m er's annoying usenet behaviour. Twinkles Lawns 0 28-10-2003 08:42 PM
Apology if Mad Bill Pal m er has been annoying members of rec.gardens? Twinkles Gardening 0 26-10-2003 04:42 PM
little annoying indoor flies Limelight Australia 2 24-07-2003 11:02 AM
Annoying Tree Oliver Keating United Kingdom 10 11-06-2003 07:20 PM
Annoying Tree Oliver Keating United Kingdom 2 09-06-2003 05:56 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:30 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 GardenBanter.co.uk.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Gardening"

 

Copyright © 2017