Scotland’s beavers need your help

A short diversion from this blog’s theme, but an important one.

Scottish charity Trees for Life is making a legal challenge against NatureScot (formerly known as SNH), with the intention of taking the Government’s nature conservation agency to court for allowing too many beavers to be killed.

Legal challenges are not for the faint-hearted nor for the lazy. They are hard work and time-consuming. They also cost money.

Trees for Life has a crowdfunder which is open for another 7 days. They’ve raised over £25K so far, with a target of £40K. The crowdfunder also provides details about why this legal challenge is necessary.

If you can help them, please support it here.

For those interested in more detail about the beaver saga in Scotland, the links in this piece from The Ferret are illuminating.

18 thoughts on “Scotland’s beavers need your help”

  1. You will have to excuse me but the irony of killing a reintroduction is something I have great difficulty getting my head around wouldn’t it have been kinder to have not moved these creatures in the first place ?
    Another fine mess.

    1. Yes, it looks like the reintroduction was little more than a ploy to give the appearance of doing the right thing.
      Those responsible for this state of affairs are not trustworthy.

  2. When animals are released, it’s hard to accept there needs to be some control or to accept that mistakes can happen and that there has to be consequences.
    The Uk is to small to allow natural regeneration, even our great Oaks are hybrids , our rivers contaminate each other via canals, our beaches move due to structures, and people and politics meddle with many just playing king of the hill.

    1. A ridiculous comment and scientifically illiterate. Anthropocentrism is at the root of our environmental decline and attitudes like yours, that advocate for ‘control’ (read: killing) as if it’s simply self evident, will only perpetuate further biodiversity loss.

      Also, the UK isn’t ‘too small’ for natural regeneration; there are plenty of projects (e.g. montane scrub regeneration in Scotland) which have been extremely successful in showing the befits of stepping back from extractive land use. You’re using the type of talking points that intensive agriculture and intensive game shoot use, which is nothing more than an appeal to the status quo and an incredibly deceptive way of telling people that “better things aren’t possible”. If it wasn’t for orgs like Trees for life, powerful lobbies would be saying that the Caledonian forest regeneration isn’t possible, much like you are.

      1. So our native trees are gone, our wildlife trusts spray herbicide, our lakes and locks are full of carp and non native trout, our rivers acidified by nice trees from America, our scientists agree over who runs the stud book for the snow leopard while every year we loose more natives, animals that breed easy, like hedgehog s and the wild cat.
        My opinion is you can use long words but fail to understand that even the expert community have egos and greed, their work is not for the benefit of anyone other than themselves.
        Trees have been planted that we use helicopters to remove, landfills flood, yet we continue funding science when we need regulators with balls.

        1. Our native tees haven’t ‘gone’, and even if they had, what relevance does that have to reintroduction of keystone species like the beaver? Absolutely none. Beavers will be incredibly important for biodiversity in riparian zones, as well as holding back water in upland areas.

          “…the expert community have egos and greed, their work is not for the benefit of anyone other than themselves.”

          What on Earth are you talking about. Instead of making sweeping, ignorant comments about a whole demographic of people, have the guts to give us specific evidence.

    1. Sorry but as the people of the UK are finding it impossible to care for some of the most fantastic creatures on the planet I see no point in throwing good money after bad.

      1. Well I’ll be donating and also writing to MSP’s as to who appointed heads of Natural Scotland, because, along with a certain Mr Ewing, they seem to be doing the very opposite of what I would want to protect wildlife ant the environment.
        The beavers, Mountain Hares, badgers etc were here long before sheep and modern farming methods introduced. I hear there is clamour from the NFU for reintroduction of banned pesticides, widely linked to cancer. The risks of course are far less to the 16stone farmer sitting in his sealed tractor cabin, spraying across fields, than to the toddler playing in the garden over the wall from the field where the spraying is taking place- as in my kids case so frequently.The risk to the child- and even more to those in the womb- will be multiple times that to a grown man. The impression is given that is of no concern.
        Certainly it’s time to challenge the right of a not insignificant number in farming and countryside ‘sports’ -and those who act for them in government,who do defile the land, massacre native wildlife and deny so much to so many-and I was brought up in a house with a gun room complete with guns.
        Thanks for all you do Raptor Persecution Scotland –

  3. Sadly the Scottish Government has a record of speaking with a forked tongue.
    Decades ago they “protected” foxes but refused to police and enforce the anti-hunting law. Soon after seals were “protected” only for Marine Scotland to issue licences and “train” people to shoot them. The “protection” given to the Tayside beavers (which were not part of the official reintroduction programme) was equally farcical with lethal licences issued and advice on killing given. Soon mountain hares will be given similar “protection”.
    Deer are being culled under special licences allowing hinds to be killed while they have dependant young.
    On Islay the incompetent Government cullers paid to kill geese would have been banned from a fairground shooting gallery.
    Perhaps, instead of continually crowd funding to pay lawyers to try and force the Scottish Government to see sense, we should be mounting a major campaign to root out the culling mentality at the centre of what is now ironically called NatureScot?
    Ewing and his Ministerial colleagues seem very unwilling to take on the land owners and land “managers” who make careers out of messing up the natural environment and persecuting native wildlife.

    1. Cant argue with that John – and yet there are so many in this scottish government who are wildlife and natural habitat supporters – what hold do the killers have over senior government figures?

      1. I wish I knew Dave. Government Ministers and eventually governments come and go but the long outdated cull and “manage” mentality has persisted for decades. It cannot just be the politicians’ wish to be all things to all people, there must be advisers., policy drafters and administrators who see their role as facilitators for estate owners, farmers, fishery interests and the like. You only have to look at the amount of redaction in documents very reluctantly provided under FOI legislation to realise that protecting the exploiters has a far greater priority than protecting wildlife and their environment.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s