Religion and Ethics Forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: Hope on November 12, 2015, 09:25:19 AM
-
If one catches a grey squirrel in a humane trap - perhaps in one's roofspace - is one required to kill it humanely, or should one release it, abeit at a reasonable distance from your property?
I ask as I've been asked for advice on a local info-sharing website.
PS - I'm aware that regs regarding red squirrels are different to greys
-
Release it, of course.
Amazed that you even have to ask.
-
If one catches a grey squirrel in a humane trap - perhaps in one's roofspace - is one required to kill it humanely, or should one release it, abeit at a reasonable distance from your property?
I ask as I've been asked for advice on a local info-sharing website.
PS - I'm aware that regs regarding red squirrels are different to greys
I am not sure about that one.
-
Release it, of course.
Amazed that you even have to ask.
The person who asked thought that UK legislation required that a grey be killed.
-
Release it, of course.
Amazed that you even have to ask.
Amazingly, you turn out to be wrong in the eyes of the law. In law, if you catch a live grey squirrel you must dispatch it humanely.
http://www.rsne.org.uk/squirrels-and-law
-
Release it, of course.
Amazed that you even have to ask.
Amazingly, you turn out to be wrong in the eyes of the law. In law, if you catch a live grey squirrel you must dispatch it humanely.
http://www.rsne.org.uk/squirrels-and-law
Then bollocks to the law.
-
As I understand it's illegal to release it.
We have no reds here so when we caught one in our loft, we just let it go in the garden.
If the person who asked actually has a caught squirrel the situation needs to be resolved ASAP because of stress to the animal.
-
Release it, of course.
Amazed that you even have to ask.
Amazingly, you turn out to be wrong in the eyes of the law. In law, if you catch a live grey squirrel you must dispatch it humanely.
http://www.rsne.org.uk/squirrels-and-law
Then bollocks to the law.
Grey squirrels are considered to be pests mainly because they damage trees and have displaced the native red squirrel population.
Furthermore, if you catch a live one, releasing it in an area it doesn't know is considered to be inhumane by the RSPCA.
http://www.rspca.org.uk/servlet/BlobServer?blobcol=urlblob&blobtable=RSPCABlob&blobkey=id&blobwhere=1062684074395&blobheader=application/pdf
-
Release it, of course.
Amazed that you even have to ask.
Amazingly, you turn out to be wrong in the eyes of the law. In law, if you catch a live grey squirrel you must dispatch it humanely.
http://www.rsne.org.uk/squirrels-and-law
Then bollocks to the law.
Grey squirrels are considered to be pests mainly because they damage trees and have displaced the native red squirrel population.
I'm aware.
Furthermore, if you catch a live one, releasing it in an area it doesn't know is considered to be inhumane by the RSPCA.
http://www.rspca.org.uk/servlet/BlobServer?blobcol=urlblob&blobtable=RSPCABlob&blobkey=id&blobwhere=1062684074395&blobheader=application/pdf
More stressful, less stressful or about the same stressful as being killed "humanely" by some clueless twat who hasn't the faintest idea what they're doing?
-
Or take it to a vet in a car. That wouldn't be at all stressful for a wild creature, would it? ::)
-
Grey squirrels are considered to be pests mainly because they damage trees and have displaced the native red squirrel population.
Furthermore, if you catch a live one, releasing it in an area it doesn't know is considered to be inhumane by the RSPCA.
http://www.rspca.org.uk/servlet/BlobServer?blobcol=urlblob&blobtable=RSPCABlob&blobkey=id&blobwhere=1062684074395&blobheader=application/pdf
Furthermore, it is an offence under section 14 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981) to introduce and release grey squirrels into the wild
http://basc.org.uk/game-and-gamekeeping/advice-and-fact-sheets/basc-grey-squirrel-control/
I think part of the problem is that the definition of killing them humanely is so narrow that the offence I refer to above and the offence of killing them non-humanely can get very close to each other.
-
More stressful, less stressful or about the same stressful as being killed "humanely" by some clueless twat who hasn't the faintest idea what they're doing?
If you read the RSPCA PDF, you'll see they recommend that clueless twats don't try to catch squirrels.
If you do catch one, you are between a rock and a hard place if you don't know how to handle it safely and kill it humanely. And if you just release it again into its own environment, nothing has changed except you have technically broken the law. If you release it elsewhere, you will cause it lots of stress at the minimum plus you have technically broken the law.
-
As ever with the "Authorities," if it's any kind of nuisance, kill it. I won't forget their disgraceful slaughter of livestock in the foot-and-mouth outbreak: and that was wrong.
-
I think part of the problem is that the definition of killing them humanely is so narrow that the offence I refer to above and the offence of killing them non-humanely can get very close to each other.
The RSPCA recommends you get professional pest control people in to deal with them (see the link I posted above).
-
More stressful, less stressful or about the same stressful as being killed "humanely" by some clueless twat who hasn't the faintest idea what they're doing?
If you read the RSPCA PDF, you'll see they recommend that clueless twats don't try to catch squirrels.
If you do catch one, you are between a rock and a hard place if you don't know how to handle it safely and kill it humanely. And if you just release it again into its own environment, nothing has changed except you have technically broken the law. If you release it elsewhere, you will cause it lots of stress at the minimum plus you have technically broken the law.
I've already made my feelings about the law clear, I thought.
My guiding maxim would always be "What would any normally compassionate, humane individual do with a sentient creature?" but clearly other people are not guided by such considerations.
-
I've already made my feelings about the law clear, I thought.
Well, in that case, why not campaign to have the law changed. It's a democracy, but the law currently is clear.
My guiding maxim would always be "What would any normally compassionate, humane individual do with a sentient creature?" but clearly other people are not guided by such considerations.
Maybe some people value having trees in the landscape or mourn the loss of the red squirrels.
These are wild animals. If nobody kills any of them, their population will still be controlled by starvation and predation, neither of which are particularly humane.
-
If it was caught in someone's loft just let it go back outside and make the loft secure.
-
I've already made my feelings about the law clear, I thought.
Well, in that case, why not campaign to have the law changed. It's a democracy, but the law currently is clear.
My guiding maxim would always be "What would any normally compassionate, humane individual do with a sentient creature?" but clearly other people are not guided by such considerations.
Maybe some people value having trees in the landscape or mourn the loss of the red squirrels.
These are wild animals. If nobody kills any of them, their population will still be controlled by starvation and predation, neither of which are particularly humane.
Nature has a way of dealing with all its creatures; and it controlled the environment long before Man's coming. But, as usual, Man, in his arrogance, thinks he knows best - and look at what he's done to the planet, so far! The answer, of course, as Man sees it, is to kill!
-
It was the arrogance and stupidity of humans that led to the problems with grey squirrels in the first place. So we now think we can put it right by killing them.
-
Well, in that case, why not campaign to have the law changed. It's a democracy, but the law currently is clear.
Absolutely no point. It involves non-human animals, so nothing will happen.
Maybe some people value having trees in the landscape or mourn the loss of the red squirrels.
I love trees but value sentience over non-sentience.
These are wild animals. If nobody kills any of them, their population will still be controlled by starvation and predation, neither of which are particularly humane.
No, but neither are expressions of the odious attitude "It's in the way - so kill it."
-
My guiding maxim would always be "What would any normally compassionate, humane individual do with a sentient creature?" but clearly other people are not guided by such considerations.
The problem with this approach Shaker is that it only works in an unnatural vacuum. As has been said, grey squirrels are vermin, but more than that they are an invasive species - such as mink, coypu (used to be), Japanese Knotweed, etc. - and have a deletorious impact on the UK's native species. Furthermore it damages forestry and other non-sentient organisms thus creating problems for that side of things as well. As far as I'm aware, there is no natural predator for grey squirrels here in the UK (though a dog my daughter used to foster used to make a good fist at doing so!!)
Are you suggesting that it should be left to roam unchallenged, and that its 'sentient being' status overrides its potential for damaging native species and their habitat?
-
The larger carrion and birds of prey take squirrels, as do dogs.
My biggest concern with the greys is their predation of birds' nests. But we screwed up by releasing them. Are we supposed to put right our mistake by slaughtering them?
-
As has been said, grey squirrels are vermin
Said by whom? Not by me.
Furthermore it damages forestry and other non-sentient organisms thus creating problems for that side of things as well.
Oh boo hoo.
As far as I'm aware, there is no natural predator for grey squirrels here in the UK
Wrong.
Are you suggesting that it should be left to roam unchallenged, and that its 'sentient being' status overrides its potential for damaging native species and their habitat?
Yes.
-
If one catches a grey squirrel in a humane trap - perhaps in one's roofspace - is one required to kill it humanely, or should one release it, abeit at a reasonable distance from your property?
I ask as I've been asked for advice on a local info-sharing website.
PS - I'm aware that regs regarding red squirrels are different to greys
Give it a whack on the back of the head and then eat it.
-
Nature has a way of dealing with all its creatures; and it controlled the environment long before Man's coming.
This is true, but don't for a minute think that it was anything other than nasty for most of the animals it "dealt with".
But, as usual, Man, in his arrogance, thinks he knows best - and look at what he's done to the planet, so far! The answer, of course, as Man sees it, is to kill!
That's nature's answer too.
-
No, but neither are expressions of the odious attitude "It's in the way - so kill it."
The current law about grey squirrels have nothing to do with them being in the way, at least not of humans.
-
No, but neither are expressions of the odious attitude "It's in the way - so kill it."
The current law about grey squirrels have nothing to do with them being in the way, at least not of humans.
So why does Hopeless's OP refer to laying traps in order to catch them?
-
The larger carrion and birds of prey take squirrels, as do dogs.
My biggest concern with the greys is their predation of birds' nests. But we screwed up by releasing them. Are we supposed to put right our mistake by slaughtering them?
Have you got a better idea?
We could just leave them to their own devices and eventually nature will find a new balance. It'll be a balance with perhaps fewer native species. That's always been the way, even before there were humans.
-
Nature has a way of dealing with all its creatures; and it controlled the environment long before Man's coming.
This is true, but don't for a minute think that it was anything other than nasty for most of the animals it "dealt with".
But, as usual, Man, in his arrogance, thinks he knows best - and look at what he's done to the planet, so far! The answer, of course, as Man sees it, is to kill!
That's nature's answer too.
Then leave it to Nature. Why then need we interfere?
I find it disquieting about some people that they are prepared to argue at length in favour of killing things: a very unpleasant inclination!
-
I find it disquieting about some people that they are prepared to argue at length in favour of killing things: a very unpleasant inclination!
Very much so; but most people are like this, the only difference lies in which non-human animals they apply it to.
-
Grey squirrels might look cute, but they can do a heck of a lot of damage, especially if they get into the roof space. A roof on one of our houses was damaged due to squirrel infestation. The squirrels were caught and humanely killed.
-
So why does Hopeless's OP refer to laying traps in order to catch them?
Like rats, squirrels will often get into roofspaces and chew through things like cabling and even plastic waterpipes. They also find roofspaces very suitable as nesting spaces. For obvious reasons, this means that they come into conflict with humans. However, traps are also used outside by some because of their preadtive behaviour regarding birds, as well as eating food being grown - in gardens, for instance.
-
No, but neither are expressions of the odious attitude "It's in the way - so kill it."
The current law about grey squirrels have nothing to do with them being in the way, at least not of humans.
So why does Hopeless's OP refer to laying traps in order to catch them?
I thought you were talking about squirrels generally, not Hope's current case. I'd start by trying what Rhiannon suggested and I'd only kill the squirrel if I couldn't persuade it to go away of its own accord.
-
I find it disquieting about some people that they are prepared to argue at length in favour of killing things: a very unpleasant inclination!
So, you'd be happy to see native species of flora and fauna destroyed by invasive species?
-
It seems to me erroneous to have something called Nature (leaving aside the anthropomorphising of it) and then regarding Man as external to it.
-
Then leave it to Nature. Why then need we interfere?
Well, my parents once had to kill a rat that invaded their house because it got into the potato store and then proceeded to chew through various random cables over the course of a number of days. I suppose they could have caught it in a live trap and relocated it. If it happens again, can we release it into your garden?
-
It seems to me erroneous to have something called Nature (leaving aside the anthropomorphising of it) and then regarding Man as external to it.
Reminds me of the 'different context' story of the man who refused to be rescued from flooding by a rowboat or helicopter on the grounds that he was 'waiting for God to rescue him'.
-
Like rats, squirrels will often get into roofspaces and chew through things like cabling and even plastic waterpipes. They also find roofspaces very suitable as nesting spaces. For obvious reasons, this means that they come into conflict with humans. However, traps are also used outside by some because of their preadtive behaviour regarding birds, as well as eating food being grown - in gardens, for instance.
Given the mania for house-building in what is already too small an area with too many people crammed into it, this 'conflict' will only get worse because more and more humans are invading the space formerly occupied by wild animals, leaving the squirrels, rats, foxes and all the rest of the fauna in the way of whatever humans want to do, which for the most part is pollute and destroy. Given that most people in most places in most ways most of the time are stupid, lazy, greedy, weak, cruel, arrogant and selfish, said people -even non-believers, if they're not very bright ones - will always have that attenuated remnant of a religious attitude in them which allows them to get away with seeing themselves as the crown of creation and in possession of carte blanche to ride (often literally) roughshod over the lives of other beings and so much the worse for them.
-
Given the mania for house-building
What mania for house building? It seems to me that, every 10 minutes somebody laments that we do not build enough houses, hence the house price bubble.
in what is already too small an area with too many people crammed into it, this 'conflict' will only get worse because more and more humans are invading the space formerly occupied by wild animals, leaving the squirrels, rats, foxes and all the rest of the fauna in the way of whatever humans want to do
But this is the way of nature of which you correctly stated we are part. Invasive species come in and take over the habitat of the previous residents thus making them extinct. It's been going on for billions of years.
-
What mania for house building? It seems to me that, every 10 minutes somebody laments that we do not build enough houses, hence the house price bubble.
These are the people who are the ones saying we "need" to build between 200,000 and 250,000 new homes per year (even though there are already a million empty properties), yes? That mania - the one that's currently in the process of obliterating the seven and half acres of what used to be quiet green space next to me.
But this is the way of nature of which you correctly stated we are part. Invasive species come in and take over the habitat of the previous residents thus making them extinct. It's been going on for billions of years.
Except that other species have natural checks and balances to keep the numbers down - an oestrous as opposed to a menstrual cycle in females; predators - that humans lack.
-
Except that other species have natural checks and balances to keep the numbers down - an oestral as opposed to a menstrual cycle in females; predators - that humans lack.
You forget the ultimate check and balance.
An invasive species may not have any predators in its new environment, in which case the population will grow until the local resources cannot sustain it, then it will crash. I see no reason why humans would not be susceptible to that too.
-
Taking a long while and costing a lot in the natural world and other species for the human population to crash, isn't it?
-
Given the mania for house-building in what is already too small an area with too many people crammed into it, this 'conflict' will only get worse because more and more humans are invading the space formerly occupied by wild animals, leaving the squirrels, rats, foxes and all the rest of the fauna in the way of whatever humans want to do, which for the most part is pollute and destroy. Given that most people in most places in most ways most of the time are stupid, lazy, greedy, weak, cruel, arrogant and selfish, said people -even non-believers, if they're not very bright ones - will always have that attenuated remnant of a religious attitude in them which allows them to get away with seeing themselves as the crown of creation and in possession of carte blanche to ride (often literally) roughshod over the lives of other beings and so much the worse for them.
I believe that this is an issue that exists beyond the borders of the UK, Shaker
-
Doubtless, but since I live in the UK, that's what I'm discussing.
-
Red squirrels occupy boreal, coniferous woods in northern Europe and Siberia, preferring Scots pine, Norway spruce and Siberian pine.
http://www.forestry.gov.uk/fr/INFD-8C8BHC
If the red squirrels prefer coniferous forests why are we worried about them disappearing in England?
Edit: see below
-
Red squirrels are often associated with conifer forests. This is not because this is their favourite habitat, but because it is the only habitat where they have a slight competitive advantage over the grey squirrel. In fact, their preferred habitat is mixed deciduous woodland with occasional conifers, giving a wide range of food sources, from hazel nuts and sweet chestnuts to pine cones.
http://www.cornwallredsquirrels.co.uk/page6.htm
-
Some of them, yes.
-
Shaker's position on this is absolutely ignorant, very arrogant, and if it were to be adopted, environmentally damaging. Haven't you lost enough of your native animals Shaker?
Shed your tears for the native squirrels Shaker and get educated.
http://www.actionbioscience.org/biodiversity/simberloff.html
http://hubpages.com/politics/Invasive-Animal-Species-in-Great-Britain-Alien-Species-That-Should-Not-Be-In-The-UK
-
Irritatingly twee website but it has some good info.
http://www.grey-squirrel.org.uk/reds.php
-
Well that's where you find squirrels, isn't it - up a twee.
Sowwy :-[
-
Ok, aside from shaker, does anyone else worry about polishing off the rats in their area?
I have a drey in the large tree at the bottom of my garden and squirrels abound in large numbers, in fact we are infested with them.
Fortunately none have broken into my loft, so I leave them alone ( except on the rare occasion tree surgeons have to trim back the tree).
I like the red squirrel best and feel the grey one is not much more than a pest.
I feel the same way about the grey squirrel as I do about American crayfish and mink, and Japanese knotweed and ragwort.
They are damaging to our native species and there are too many of them.
🌰
As alternative idea on grey squirrels and their uses ;)
http://m.wikihow.com/Cook-Squirrel
The American crawfish can also be dealt with the same way, but you have to be careful though ( and get permission from the landowner and a license) because in our local river ( very close to me ) someone accidentally killed an otter in the crayfish trap ( no it wasn't me 🌹).
They are extremely reluctant to issue a license where there are otters because some crayfish traps can cause Otters to drown.
I had the information from a very good official source.
You can get otter friendly traps, but who ever laid that one, didn't ask first.
I didn't even know we had otters, but apparently we have.
🌹
Another "kill them, they're a nuisance," brigade. I don't know if you've ever had any compassion for anything. but if you have, it doesn't show. How can you dismiss creatures as a pest, etc, when all they are trying to do is get by. They're not human, you know, with some bizarre inclination to be as horrible and awkward as they can!
-
Ok, aside from shaker, does anyone else worry about polishing off the rats in their area?
I have a drey in the large tree at the bottom of my garden and squirrels abound in large numbers, in fact we are infested with them.
Fortunately none have broken into my loft, so I leave them alone ( except on the rare occasion tree surgeons have to trim back the tree).
I like the red squirrel best and feel the grey one is not much more than a pest.
I feel the same way about the grey squirrel as I do about American crayfish and mink, and Japanese knotweed and ragwort.
They are damaging to our native species and there are too many of them.
🌰
As alternative idea on grey squirrels and their uses ;)
http://m.wikihow.com/Cook-Squirrel
The American crawfish can also be dealt with the same way, but you have to be careful though ( and get permission from the landowner and a license) because in our local river ( very close to me ) someone accidentally killed an otter in the crayfish trap ( no it wasn't me 🌹).
They are extremely reluctant to issue a license where there are otters because some crayfish traps can cause Otters to drown.
I had the information from a very good official source.
You can get otter friendly traps, but who ever laid that one, didn't ask first.
I didn't even know we had otters, but apparently we have.
🌹
Rats are very nasty vermin which can carry disease, I have no problem with them being exterminated. My neighbour take pot shots at the ones in his garden with an air rifle.
-
Ok, aside from shaker, does anyone else worry about polishing off the rats in their area?
I have a drey in the large tree at the bottom of my garden and squirrels abound in large numbers, in fact we are infested with them.
Fortunately none have broken into my loft, so I leave them alone ( except on the rare occasion tree surgeons have to trim back the tree).
I like the red squirrel best and feel the grey one is not much more than a pest.
I feel the same way about the grey squirrel as I do about American crayfish and mink, and Japanese knotweed and ragwort.
They are damaging to our native species and there are too many of them.
🌰
As alternative idea on grey squirrels and their uses ;)
http://m.wikihow.com/Cook-Squirrel
The American crawfish can also be dealt with the same way, but you have to be careful though ( and get permission from the landowner and a license) because in our local river ( very close to me ) someone accidentally killed an otter in the crayfish trap ( no it wasn't me 🌹).
They are extremely reluctant to issue a license where there are otters because some crayfish traps can cause Otters to drown.
I had the information from a very good official source.
You can get otter friendly traps, but who ever laid that one, didn't ask first.
I didn't even know we had otters, but apparently we have.
🌹
Rats are very nasty vermin which can carry disease, I have no problem with them being exterminated. My neighbour take pot shots at the ones in his garden with an air rifle.
I'm glad I don't live anywhere near you. People with air rifles are a menace. I wonder how many rats you see during a normal day?
-
They say that no one is more than ten feet from a rat. I have an absolute phobia of these creatures (not logical as I am quite happy to own a gerbil!), and spend quite a lot of time filling in the frequent rat holes in the garden pouring bleach down them as a deterrent. We see fewer of them these days, since I took that course of action, as we used see a rat at least once or twice a day, it is now about once a week. I also got rid of the compost bin in which I would put fruit and veg peelings, that seemed to encourage them too.
-
They say that no one is more than ten feet from a rat. I have an absolute phobia of these creatures (not logical as I am quite happy to own a gerbil!), and spend quite a lot of time filling in the frequent rat holes in the garden pouring bleach down them as a deterrent. We see fewer of them these days, since I took that course of action, as we used see a rat at least once or twice a day, it is now about once a week. I also got rid of the compost bin in which I would put fruit and veg peelings, that seemed to encourage them too.
Living next to a watercourse, we have them all over the place - though some are water rats as opposed to the more unpleasant 'land' rats (for want of a better definition)
-
Then they'll be water voles, Hope.
-
They say that no one is more than ten feet from a rat. I have an absolute phobia of these creatures (not logical as I am quite happy to own a gerbil!), and spend quite a lot of time filling in the frequent rat holes in the garden pouring bleach down them as a deterrent. We see fewer of them these days, since I took that course of action, as we used see a rat at least once or twice a day, it is now about once a week. I also got rid of the compost bin in which I would put fruit and veg peelings, that seemed to encourage them too.
Living next to a watercourse, we have them all over the place - though some are water rats as opposed to the more unpleasant 'land' rats (for want of a better definition)
Funnily enough our previous property was in a very rural area, with a small river only yards away from the house, but in the 15 years we lived there I only once saw a rat.
-
So now we all are clear. Shaker will make one of his skin peeling, unholy, stinks because homes were being built next to him. He is happy to deny others what he has, a house. A bug has more importance than a fellow human being to the resident Marxist. But the kicker is he is happy to allow an invasive animal to move in, stealing the homes of the native species, and bringing about their extinction.
Shaker, you need to eat some meat. Or maybe start eating the flies that are constantly buzzing and crawling all of you as you lay on your sofa eating bon bons by the crate
Invasive species are a threat globally.
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/jan/22/invasive-species-threat
-
The information provided by Rhiannon's link in #50 at the very least casts doubt on the widely-held belief that grey squirrels displace red ones.
-
In the part of South Africa where I live we also have the American Grey Squirrel, introduced to this country by an arrogant, unpleasant English colonialist whose name is equivalent to a four letter word amongst the majority of the population. These squirrels have adapted fairly well to the urban environment where they are a pest in many towns of the Western Cape. In particular they are responsible for killing many young birds while still in their nests, a loss we can ill-afford. But fortunately they have not succeeded in adapting to the natural environment so their impact is limited.
But we have another alien here which makes your grey squirrel problem look like a Sunday School picnic in comparison. This is the Himalayan Tahr, a large mountain goat. Indigenous to the mountainous areas of India, a few were brought into the country late in the 1800’s by the same said gentlemen and placed in the Cape Town Zoo situated at that time on the lower eastern slopes of Table Mountain. In the 1930’s a pair escaped from the zoo and headed up the mountain. They had no natural predators. They were too large for the small members of the cat family and even for baboons, which will pull down small buck given the chance. They are incredibly skilful climbers and spend much of their time on precipitous rock faces and ledges. They rapidly multiplied. They competed for the same territory as a small indigenous buck known as the klipspringer (literal translation ‘rock jumper’) and are extremely intolerant of co-existing with other species. Soon the numbers of klipspringers started to decline alarmingly and they were in danger of being eliminated from the Table Mountain chain.
The Tahrs grazing habits are also completely unsuitable to the endemic fynbos vegetation in the Western Cape. They tend to completely strip a plant causing it to become unviable. As their numbers grew areas becoming denuded of vegetation increased with a loss of biodiversity and erosion during heavy winter rains.
All this presented the Environmental Agencies with a problem. Should they do nothing and allow ‘nature’ to take its course with the inevitable elimination of the klipspringer and many of the fynbos species? Or should they intervene and take active steps to remove these alien Tahrs from the area.
The dilemma was compounded by the fact that capturing and relocating the Tahrs was impossible due to their habitat of living on the rock faces of the mountain. The only way to deal with them was to hunt and shoot them.
Would be interested to hear views on what your recommendations would be if you were charged with the responsibility of making the final decision.
-
Shaker,
Get educated, Rhi's link is BS.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/introduced-species-pose-environmental-threat/
-
The information provided by Rhiannon's link in #50 at the very least cssts doubt on the widely-held belief that grey squirrels displace red ones.
There is evidence that they do just that, Shaker: after all, areas that used to have red squirrel populations don't any longer and their demise coincides with the arrival of the greys. However, that is not the only reason why greys are considered to be vermin. The others match those of rats being deemed vermin.
-
Then they'll be water voles, Hope.
We were told by the environment folk that they weren't voles, but nor were they ordinary rats.
-
There is evidence that they do just that, Shaker
Then instead of asserting it, provide it.
(Not that you will, obviously).
-
The information provided by Rhiannon's link in #50 at the very least casts doubt on the widely-held belief that grey squirrels displace red ones.
We're told it's 'conclusive' that badgers spread TB, too.
-
I seem to remember an item on the One Show, which suggested that the red squirrel population there is getting the upper hand over the greys. Leave it to Nature!