Tag: trap

Kildrummy Estate: vicarious liability prosecution?

On 11th December 2014, Scottish gamekeeper (and SGA member) George Mutch was convicted of four wildlife crime offences that he’d committed on the Kildrummy Estate, Aberdeenshire in 2012 (see here).

On 12th January 2015, Mutch was given a four month custodial sentence for his crimes; the first gamekeeper to be jailed in the UK for killing raptors (see here).

Both his conviction and sentence were widely welcomed across the conservation community, not least because video evidence had been deemed admissible in this case and because the agencies involved in the investigation and prosecution had worked exceptionally hard to achieve these results.

Hopes were high that a subsequent vicarious liability prosecution would follow, especially when a journalist friend told us that Fiscal Tom Dysart had made a point of asking Mutch in court whether he’d received any training for the use of his traps, to which Mutch had replied, “No”. That response would indicate that a defence of ‘due diligence‘ wouldn’t stand up to scrutiny for anyone charged with being vicariously liable for Mutch’s crimes. All good so far, although Andy Wightman cast doubt over the feasibility of charging someone from Kildrummy Estate given the difficulty of establishing ownership there (read his blog here).

So seven months on, what’s happening now?

Well, it all gets a bit interesting around about now.  As we understand it, for offences committed under the Wildlife & Countryside Act, criminal proceedings MUST begin within three years from the date of the commission of the offence (two years in England & Wales). After three years, the case becomes ‘time-barred’ and it is no longer possible to prosecute.

Mutch was convicted of four offences, and the dates those offences were commissioned are as follows (info from COPFS press release, January 2015) –

  1. On 14 August 2012 & 15 August 2012, Mutch did intentionally or recklessly kill or take a wild bird, namely a goshawk.
  2. On 23 August 2012 and 24 August 2012, Mutch did intentionally or recklessly take a wild bird, namely a buzzard.
  3. On 28 August 2012, Mutch did intentionally or recklessly kill, injure or take a wild bird, namely a goshawk.
  4. Between 6 August 2012 – 13 September 2012, Mutch did use a trap to catch two goshawks and a buzzard.

Pay close attention to those dates. The first three offences are now time-barred (unless someone has already been charged) because it is over three years since they took place. The final offence is not quite time-barred, but will be by this Sunday (13 Sept 2015).

So, two big questions:

  1.  Has somebody from Kildrummy Estate been charged for a vicarious liability prosecution for the first three offences, and if not, why not?
  2. Is the Crown Office intending to charge someone (before Sunday) from Kildrummy Estate for a vicarious liability prosecution for the fourth offence, and if not, why not?

This case is of huge public interest and we don’t think it unreasonable to be asking questions, especially when successive Environment Ministers keep telling us that the effectiveness of Government policy against the raptor killers will be measured by the success of approaches such as vicarious liability.

If, like us, you’re curious about what’s happening with this case, you can email the Crown Office and ask them. The usual response when we ask about criminal cases is ‘As this case is on-going it would be inappropriate to comment’. It’s a handy ‘get out’ option when the authorities want to keep the public in the dark. The Crown Office could legitimately respond like this in this case, if they’ve already charged somebody. However, if they haven’t charged anybody, then the case is now time-barred and therefore cannot be said to be ‘on-going’.

Let’s see how transparent and accountable they wish to be. Emails to Helen Nisbet, Head of Wildlife & Environmental Crime Unit, Crown Office & Procurators Fiscal Office: Helen.Nisbet@copfs.gsi.gov.uk

Satellite-tagging golden eagles in Scotland

ge GUARDIAN pics 2015

There is a series of absolutely stunning photographs in the Guardian (photographer Dan Kitwood/Getty Images) of golden eagles being satellite-tagged in the Scottish Highlands – see here.

They feature the work of some of the top class fieldworkers from the Scottish Raptor Study Group, notably Justin Grant and Dr Ewan Weston. These two, along with a handful of others, are among the best in the world – they have spent years monitoring, ringing and sat-tagging white-tailed and golden eagles (as well as many other species!), all under licence, and it’s thanks to their expertise and dedication that not only have we learned a lot about the dispersal movements of these iconic species, but we’re also now able to see where many of them are being poisoned, trapped, shot, or simply ‘disappearing’ – see here.

Gamekeeper’s trial collapses after District Judge rules RSPB covert video “disproportionate”

A Shropshire gamekeeper has been cleared of charges relating to the alleged illegal use of a trap after the District Judge pronounced the RSPB’s use of covert surveillance “disproportionate”.

Neil Wainwright had been accused of using a Larsen trap, illegally baited with two live quails, to trap birds of prey. The trap, set near to a pheasant pen, had been seen by an RSPB investigator (whilst walking on a public right of way), who had returned the following day to install covert video (on private land) to determine the identity of the trap user.

Footage from the camera had identified Wainwright, who was also reportedly seen carrying a dead buzzard. The RSPB then alerted the police who began an investigation, resulting in the Crown Prosecution Service taking the case to court.

This case featured several court hearings, and during one of these Wainwright had admitted using the trap baited with live quail but had claimed he was targeting mink, not birds of prey. So his use of the trap wasn’t in question (because he hadn’t denied using it); just his purpose for using it (which was the basis for some of the charges against him).

It’s very strange then, that the District Judge, Kevin Grego, should then exclude the video evidence and claim its use to be “disproportionate” because the RSPB didn’t have the landowner’s permission to film there. This implies that the RSPB should have sought the landowner’s permission, which would have been a complete non-starter because for all they knew, the landowner and/or the agent may have been complicit with any alleged offences so asking for permission to film would have defeated the objective of filming. It may also imply that the judge thought that the RSPB should have approached the police before setting the camera. However, for the police to have been involved they would have needed to seek authority to film under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. The chances of them getting that authority for what may be considered a minor offence (in terms of the scale used to categorize the seriousness of all crimes, not just wildlife crimes) on private land would be pretty slim.

In which case, any trap user intent on illegal activity to trap and kill birds of prey on private land can be assured that the chance of being prosecuted is virtually non-existent. In other words, they’re untouchable.

This is the second time this year that RSPB video footage in relation to the alleged mis-use of a trap by a gamekeeper has been ruled inadmissible in England – see here for earlier case. These are interesting developments because covert video footage has long been accepted as admissible in the English courts, as opposed to the difficulty of having it accepted by the Scottish courts. And although neither of these two recent cases set a legal precedent, you can bet your house that defence lawyers in future English cases will be pointing to these findings as they try to justify having similar evidence dismissed.

These examples serve to demonstrate, once again, just how high the odds are stacked against securing a conviction for wildlife crimes that take place in relatively remote areas where direct witnesses are few and far between.

Wainwright’s case wasn’t a complete failure though. He was convicted of three other offences which wouldn’t have come to light without this investigation in to the alleged mis-use of the trap: failure to properly store ammunition (two offences, for which he was fined a total of £300) and failure to store a dangerous chemical securely (Phostoxin, a highly toxic fumigant used to gas moles, rabbits etc) which was found in his vehicle (one offence, for which he was fined £200). He was also ordered to pay £85 costs and a £30 surcharge.

Previous blogs on this case here, here and here.

BBC news article on Wainwright’s trial here

Trial against gamekeeper Neil Wainwright gets underway

The trial against Shropshire gamekeeper Neil Wainwright got underway on Tuesday.

Wainwright, 55, of Norbury, Bishop’s Castle, is accused of baiting a Larsen trap with live quail to catch birds of prey. The offences are alleged to have taken place at Birch Hill Wood in Gatten, Stipperstones, in July 2014. Wainwright has denied these charges, but at an earlier hearing pled guilty to three other charges relating the storage of firearms, ammunition and poison (see here and here).

According to an article published yesterday in the Shropshire Star (see below), Wainwright’s defence is that he was using the Larsen to trap a mink, not birds of prey.

We always enjoy reading the far-fetched explanations of gamekeepers who have been accused of alleged wildlife crimes. Rarely plausible, they often push the boundaries of credibility. Recently-convicted Kildrummy Estate gamekeeper George Mutch’s explanation was a classic – he claimed he’d killed the goshawk he’d caught in his Larsen trap as a mercy mission because it was injured. The Sheriff in that case called it “a convenient lie”. Recently-convicted Swinton Estate gamekeeper Ryan Waite claimed the two illegal pole traps he’d set were for targeting squirrels, not raptors. Recently-convicted Stody Estate gamekeeper Allen Lambert claimed the 11 poisoned raptors found on his estate had been dumped there by someone with a vendetta against him.

It’s not just gamekeepers, either.

Following the discovery last month of 16 fox cubs found inside a barn in North Yorkshire in suspicious circumstances, Lord Middleton, a local landowner and hunstman reportedly suggested that the cubs ‘were being cared for by the Hunt for kind reasons’ (see here).

Wainwright’s trial will continue on 29th June 2015.

The Shropshire Star published an article yesterday about the first day of the trial although the article has now vanished from their website. Here’s a copy:

From Shropshire Star 17 June 2015

Neil Gordon Wainwright a gamekeeper used a metal Larsen trap designed to catch magpies, crows and jays he had baited with two live white quail to catch birds of prey at Birch Hill Wood in Gatten, near the Stiperstones, Shrewsbury, Magistrates Court were told by the RSPB. An inspector for the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds noticed the trap while walking on a public way and set up two covert cameras to record who came to attend to it.

Wainwright, 55, of Norbury, near Bishop’s Castle, denies charges of using a trap to kill or take a wild bird, possessing an article capable of being used to commit an offence, and failing to take steps to ensure that the needs of an animal were met.

The offences are said to have taken place between July 21 and 31 last year.

District judge Kevin Grego heard yesterday that an RSPB inspector had visited Birch Hill Wood on July 23 and believed that an offence was being committed.

Mr Richard Davenport, prosecuting, told the court that the inspector noticed that a Larsen trap had been baited with two white quails and set close to a pheasant release pen.

Howard Jones, RSPB inspector, said he had been walking on a public right of way when he saw the pheasant pen. He found the Larsen trap and then returned a day later to install the cameras.

Mr Jones said he and another inspector had checked the footage and over the course of several days the defendant was seen going to the trap.

At one point Wainwright was seen with a dead buzzard in his hands. The incidents were reported to the police and a warrant to search Wainwright’s home and outbuildings was carried out on August 5. Expert witness Dr Rodney Calvert, from Natural England and a specialist on trapping, said he had never known of a Larsen trap being used to catch anything other than crows or magpies.

Wainwright’s defence is that he was using the trap to catch mink and stoats which had been taking his game birds.

Dr Calvert said that using live quail as bait would not attract such animals but would be likely to attract wild birds.

Wainwright, who has several captive peregrine falcons and an owl at his home, said he had used the quail as bait “as an act of desperation”. He said he had been targeted by a mink and had decided to bait the trap to try and catch it.

The trial was adjourned until June 29 and will be heard at Telford Magistrates Court.

Judicial review: awaiting written decision

The judicial review brought by a Northumberland gamekeeper to question whether Natural England followed due process when they refused to give him licences to kill buzzards and sparrowhawks, has finished.

We now await the written decision of the judge, which can take weeks.

Useful background information about the judicial review process here and here.

Judicial review underway for gamekeeper who wants to kill buzzards

An important judicial review is underway at the High Court this week. It concerns the legal question about whether Natural England acted fairly when it refused licences to a gamekeeper to allow him to kill buzzards and sparrowhawks to protect his pheasants.

The JR has been brought by Northumberland gamekeeper Ricky McMorn and is backed by the National Gamekeepers’ Organisation.

Article in the Chronicle here.

We’ve blogged extensively about this over the last three years. See here for earlier posts, which include discussions about whether DEFRA/Natural England should entertain a licence application from a gamekeeper with a previous conviction for possession of a banned poison (apparently that’s not a problem), whether the National Gamekeepers’ Organisation should expel a member with a conviction for possession of a banned poison (apparently not), and whether there’s any scientific evidence to demonstrate buzzards (and sparrowhawks) have a substantially detrimental effect on game bird shoots (there isn’t).

Henry’s tour day 39: Moy Estate

Mon 8 June 2015 - Copy

Henry paid a visit to Moy Estate in the Monadliaths.

Regular blog readers will probably remember what was found on Moy Estate in 2010:

  • A dead red kite in the back of a gamekeeper’s vehicle. It had two broken legs and had died as a result of a blow to the head.
  • The remains of a further two dead red kites.
  • A red kite’s severed leg, along with wing tags that had been fitted to a sateliite-tracked red kite, hidden in holes covered with moss.
  • Six illegal baited spring traps set in the open.
  • A trapped hen harrier (still alive) caught in an illegally set spring trap.
  • A poisoned bait.
  • Four leg rings previously fitted to golden eagle chicks found in the possession of a gamekeeper.

A 20-year-old gamekeeper (James Rolfe – straight out of game-keeping college) was charged with possession of the dead red kite and was fined £1,500. No charges were ever brought against anyone for any of the other offences.

Previous blogs on Moy: see here, here, here and here. It’s particularly worth having a look at this, especially in light of recent hen harrier ‘disappearances’ in England. They weren’t necessarily shot (as the grouse-shooting industry keeps telling us) – they could just as easily have been trapped like this (as the grouse-shooting industry keeps forgetting to mention).

The gamekeeper on Moy was convicted four years ago in 2011. Since then, several more satellite-tracked red kites have ‘disappeared’ since their last signals emitted from Moy, and several buzzard and goshawk nests seem to fail each year. It’s quite windy at Moy. It was probably the wind that blew off those rings from the young golden eagles’ legs and blew them straight in to a jar inside the gamekeeper’s house. It was probably the wind that severed the leg of the red kite and then blew it in to a hole on the moor and then blew moss over the hole to cover it. It was probably the wind that blew away the more recent ‘missing’ red kites. It was probably the same wind that blew holes in those buzzard and goshawk nests, too. Still no breeding hen harriers on this estate – yep, must have been blown away.

Word has it that the game management on Moy Estate is being taken over by a sporting agent with whom we’re very familiar. Cue hundreds of thousands of pounds worth of night vision equipment to carry out his particular style of grouse moor management.

Henry left the estate before darkness fell. He lives another day, although he’s still single.

Illegal tampering with traps – results of BASC Scotland ‘study’ shows not widespread

Earlier this month we read a fascinating article published in Fife Today about the alleged illegal tampering of traps (see here).

Landowner Sir Robert Spencer-Nairn (Rankielour Estate) was talking about how he’d installed CCTV cameras ‘following a spate of incidents’ where ‘vicious’ crows had been released from traps to ‘wreak damage in the countryside’ (yep, you get the idea – he has links with GCT so what do you expect?). The article also suggested that Police Scotland  ‘is reporting a rise in the number of traps being tampered with’.

Is that right? Well, how about we look at the evidence.

Regular blog readers may recall former Environment Minister Paul Wheelhouse telling the RACCE Committee in November 2013 that there wasn’t any evidence to support or refute claims from the game-shooting industry of widespread trap interference/damage, but that a study (funded by Scottish Government – i.e. tax payers) was about to begin to try and assess those claims (see here).

That year-long study began in April 2014 and finished at the end of March 2015. BASC (Scotland) issued a press release in February 2014 to announce the start of the study, and it’s really worth a read (see here) – especially the comments attributed to Mike Holliday (BASC Scotland), Tim (Kim) Baynes (Scottish Land & Estates Moorland Group) and Alex Hogg (SGA), who all claimed that trap interference was widespread (ooh, is that the old victim card being played once more?). As well as BASC, the study was reportedly widely supported by SLE, SGA, GWCT (Scotland), Scottish Countryside Alliance, Scottish Assoc for Country Sports and NFU Scotland. Pretty good coverage then.

So how did the study go? What were the findings? An FoI has revealed all. See here:

FoI April 2015_ Illegal interference with traps and snares BASC – Copy

It turns out that this alleged problem isn’t widespread after all.

Let’s just ignore the fact that none of the data were independently verified, and assume that the gamekeepers who submitted the data were honest (because gamekeepers never lie, right?). In which case, there were 19 alleged trap interference/damage incidents throughout the year-long ‘study’. BASC has actually submitted 25 alleged incidents, but 6 of these can be immediately discounted because they allegedly took place before the study had begun and one of them didn’t even involve alleged disturbance or vandalism: “Snares being used with tag number belonging to another person”.

Of the 19 which apparently took place during the official study period, only 11 were reported to the police. Interesting then, that the article in Fife Today states ‘Police Scotland is reporting a rise in the number of traps being tampered with‘. On what evidence is Police Scotland making this claim?

If you look closely at the details of the 19 alleged incidents, you’ll notice that over one third of them took place on a single estate in Crieff. If those alleged incidents did actually take place, it suggests that there is a localised problem in that particular area; the claim of the problem being ‘widespread’ simply isn’t supported by these figures.

And what about Fife, home to Sir Robert Spencer-Nairn, who claimed in Fife Today that there had been ‘a spate of incidents’? According to the BASC data, there were only two reported incidents in Fife during this year-long study. Do two incidents (one of which didn’t even involve the release of ‘vicious’ crows from a trap) constitute ‘a spate of incidents’ or is this indicative of wildly exaggerated claims?

According to the FoI, BASC Scotland will be analysing the data and submitting a report to the Scottish Government. We look forward to reading it, especially to find out how the data were independently verified, how they assessed whether a trap/snare had been deliberately interfered with as opposed to accidentally damaged (e.g. see here) and how they justify the claim that trap interference is ‘widespread’.

Red kite illegally trapped on Scottish grouse moor has to be euthanised

The BBC news website is reporting that a red kite that had been illegally trapped last week has had to be euthanised due to the severity of its injuries.

The kite was found ‘in distress and seriously injured’ on Wednesday 13th May 2015.

The article (see here) is fairly low on details, but what has been written is actually quite informative.

It quotes a Police Scotland spokesman: “This was clearly an intentional act with the sole purpose of trapping this kind of bird of prey“.

That tells us that the bird probably wasn’t caught inside a crow cage trap (by accident), but more than likely was caught in an uncovered, illegally-set spring trap, baited and deliberately placed to trap a bird of prey by its leg(s).

The article also states that the bird was found trapped ‘on moorland west of Stirling’. This is also pretty revealing. There isn’t much moorland to the west of Stirling and the moorland that is there is managed for grouse shooting (for those who don’t know the area, have a look on google maps and look for the tell-tale muirburn strips that identify the land as a grouse moor).

This latest raptor persecution crime is not the first one reported from this area in recent months. In July 2014, a poisoned red kite was found in the area. This crime wasn’t publicised by Police Scotland and didn’t reach the public domain until we blogged about it in January this year, when we found the details hidden away in a government report. At that time, we asked blog readers to contact SNH to ask whether they had issued a General Licence restriction order for the land where the poisoned kite had been found (see here).

In February 2015, Andrew Bachell, Director of Operations at SNH responded by saying the case was ‘under consideration’ (see here).

Meanwhile, later in February, a poisoned peregrine was found on the same estate (see here). It, too, had been killed by ingesting the banned poison Carbofuran.

According to the SNH website, a General Licence restriction order has still not been issued for this estate (or any other estate, come to that).

And now, three months later, an illegally trapped red kite is discovered in what appears to be the very same area.

Somebody (or some people?) is clearly conducting a campaign of raptor persecution crimes in this area. Where’s the enforcement? Why hasn’t a General Licence restriction order been issued for this area of moorland? Had one been issued for the poisoned red kite (July 2014) or the poisoned peregrine (Feb 2015), this latest crime may not have occurred and this poor red kite may not have had to suffer such appalling injuries that it had to be euthanised.

We think it’s time to ask Environment Minister Dr Aileen McLeod some questions about the apparent lack of enforcement action in this area. Only last month she wrote an article stating that “wildlife crime will not be tolerated in modern day Scotland” and she specifically mentioned the General Licence restriction orders: “Arrangements are also in place for SNH to restrict the use of general licences where there is evidence of wildlife crime” (see here).

So, if “arrangements are also in place”, why hasn’t a General Licence restriction notice already been enforced in this particular area and when might we see notification that one has been issued? It’s time for the Government Minister responsible for tackling wildlife crime to show her mettle. Emails to: ministerforenvironment@scotland.gsi.gov.uk

Red kite photo by David Tomlinson

New trial date set for gamekeeper Neil Wainwright

A trial date has been set in the case against gamekeeper Neil Wainwright, accused of the alleged mis-use of a trap last year.

Wainwright, 54, of Norbury, near Bishop’s Castle in Shropshire, has denied charges relating to the use of live quail inside a trap in Birch Hill Wood in Gatten, Stiperstones on 22 and 28 July 2014.

At a hearing in February he pleaded guilty to three other charges relating to the storage of firearms, ammunition and poison.

The trial will begin on 16th June 2015.

Previous blog on this case here.