A Scottish gamekeeper has pleaded guilty to a snaring offence and has been fined £1,250.
Thomas Ebner, 74, of Lakeside, Reston, Berwickshire, had previously pleaded not guilty to four charges relating to an incident that took place on land believed to be used by a small shooting syndicate at Old Castles Farm, Chirnside, in the Scottish Borders on April 25th 2023, which resulted in a fox being suspended by its neck in a snare on a broken fence line where it was found foaming at the mouth and thrashing around trying to escape (see here for previous blog on this case).
At the time of the offence, snares were still lawful in Scotland but were not permitted to be set in a position where a trapped animal could be suspended, and users had to first attend a snare training course and then apply for an identification tag that would identify the snare operator and the target species.
Ebner’s previous not guilty plea had led to a trial date being set for 4th February 2025. However, in a pre-trial hearing this morning at Selkirk Sheriff Court, Ebner changed his plea to guilty of one charge and the other three charges were dropped.
I’d argue that Ebner got off lightly. A fine of £1,250 + £75 surcharge is well below the maximum sentence available, which is a custodial sentence of six months and/or a fine of £5,000. So much for those so-called ‘tougher penalties‘ for wildlife crime.
Thankfully, the use of snares in Scotland has now been banned (since 25th November 2024) under the new Wildlife Management & Muirburn (Scotland) Act, thanks to a long-running campaign by animal welfare campaigners who spent decades putting forward evidence that these devices, recently and cynically named ‘humane cable restraints’ by the game-shooting industry, are actually cruel, indiscriminate and inhumane and have no place in modern society.
UPDATE 16.30hrs: Gamekeeper pleads guilty to snaring fox – press release from SSPCA (here)
Raptor Persecution UK 
“A fine of £1,250 + £75 surcharge is well below the maximum sentence available, which is a custodial sentence of six months and/or a fine of £5,000”
Unfortunately, Scottish law has no provision for members of the public to complain about the Undue Leniency of any sentence.
People could do worse than write to their MSP asking why that is?
‘I’d argue that Ebner got off lightly. A fine of £1,250 + £75 surcharge is well below the maximum sentence available, which is a custodial sentence of six months and/or a fine of £5,000. So much for those so-called ‘tougher penalties‘ for wildlife crime.’
That’s why he pleaded guilty, knowing he would get a lesser sentence. Sadly
GOOD SO HAPPY TO HEAR THIS. ITS A PITY PEOPLE LIKE THAT DONT GET A PRISON SENTENCE….ANIMAL SNARING SO WRONG WRONG WRONG. HOPEFULLY MORE LAWS WILL DETER OFFENDER’S OF THIS TERRIBLE CRUEL PRACTICE
To me, the lenient sentences regularly handed out to wildlife criminals comes from the inherent bias within our judiciary. I might be wrong but, in my mind, the issue is that far too many judges, magistrates, barristers etc are either members of the hunting, shooting, fishing peer group or they aspire to be.
They should have to declare any conflicts of interest before being allowed to act on these cases. By that, are they members of the Countryside Alliance / BASC / a hunt / You Forgot the Birds etc.? We desperately need magistrates drawn from outside the private education / land owning classes.
Compare what usually happens with the sentence handed out to the criminal, Terence Johnston, in Sunderland who killed two young gulls and was jailed for 16 weeks, because he was tried in an urban court. When was the last time someone was jailed for killing a bird of prey or for allowing a fox or stag to be ripped to pieces by hounds?