Skip navigation

Wildlife Order

25 April 2005

Mr C Savage
EPG
River House
High Street
Belfast
Dear Chris

RE- REVIEW OF WILDLIFE ORDER 1985

I refer to the CNCC special meeting of the 9 February, to consider the review of the Wildlife Order 1985 and in particular the content of the draft consultation paper.

Council would like to highlight the various comments emerging from that meeting as follows:

Para 13

  • The Irish hare is currently covered by a Special Protection Order which is reviewed each year. If the hare is protected under schedule 5 there would be higher penalties compared to that under the SPO and the hare could qualify with the criteria 'declining in abundance' with a non-statutory review every 5 years. However, Council would urge caution in the future management and change of status of the Irish hare. The preliminary findings of the Queen's ESA study suggests that the hare has sustained or increased numbers slightly in the east especially Antrim, but they have declined in the west. It is not possible to say whether the recent recovery is sustainable and could be attributed to a number of factors including late cuts of silage. As the change in agricultural practice is the most likely cause in the decline of the Irish hare, Council recommends that most effort should be put into ensuring change in agricultural practice to ensure the conservation of the hare and that EHS should prevail on DARD to exploit CAP reforms to achieve less intensive agricultural practices.

Council has also noted that illegal hunting of hares with dogs has been reported. Illegal hunting focuses on places where hare numbers are probably greatest and results in mortality and scattering of hares to sub optimal habitat where they may not survive or breed, hence laws regarding illegal hunting should be rigorously enforced and strengthened.

  • Council suggests that EHS works with responsible organisations representing hunting and other sporting interests to improve habitat management as a trade off for being allowed to continue their pursuits on a licenced basis. Properly organised hunting and coursing, as practised under the rules of the Irish Coursing Club should not conflict with the objectives of the conservation of hares. Any positive habitat management should more than offset any direct loss of hares due to these activities. Indeed, legal pursuits should provide a better buffer against illegal hunting making these less likely in areas where legal activities are present and where competing illegal activities may be reported and acted upon.
  • We note that the EHS study is still to report either late spring or summer and would urge the use of the precautionary principle and use of all methods both mandatory and voluntary to ensure the recovery of the Irish hare.
  • Members were concerned that the use of the word 'perhaps' could give the wrong impression about the actual outcomes of the species action plan.
  • We note that the Schedules are reviewed every 5 years on a non-statutory basis and feel that the Wildlife Order should include provision for a statutory review.

In conclusion, on balance Council would favour not adding the Irish hare to Schedule 5 at this stage, but allowing time for other mechanisms to take effect. However, the position must be kept under close review.

Para.14

We note that a DNA analysis is to be carried out on the Red Grouse in order to establish the distinctiveness of the Irish population. Members suggest that EHS contacts Mr Malley who would be able to give the history on the importation of the Red Grouse to Ireland.

If it is found that there is still an Irish Red Grouse population we agree that in view of its rarity it should be protected.

Other Game Species - Fish - Additions to Schedule 5

  • Skate were of commercial benefit. However, in many instances this species was unintentionally gathered up by trawlers. It could be difficult to impose the legislation particularly in the case of fishing from angling boats. We suggest that guidance notes would be useful on how to handle skate, tope and sharks when caught.
  • Members suggest the use of exclusion zones for areas of non-fishing, but we recognise that this is happening for some species such as porpoises, but in many cases science was not sound enough to identify exclusion zones.
  • Council believes that it is important for NI to have parity with GB and ROI in protecting fish species and suggest that EPG undertakes an exercise on how protection measures are implemented in GB and ROI.. Members suggest that it would also be useful for EPG to analyse the outcomes of the Irish Sea Pilot.
  • In the case of Crayfish it was noted that even though it will be protected, it could be difficult to refuse a licence for fishing to an established fish merchant.

Paras 15-19 Biodiversity

  • Members propose that the wording of Scotland's legislation would be appropriate for the NI law in the context of biodiversity and the wording in the RoI legislation could be applied in the context of Biodiversity Action Plans. Some thought should be given to the inclusion of conservation of biodiversity in the context of river basement management plans under the WFD.
  • It was important that references to the NI Biodiversity Strategy be included in the new legislation; these will help strengthen the powers of DOE.
  • Council suggests that the DOE public consultation document should clarify who is responsible for producing the 3-yearly report on progress of the Biodiversity Strategy.
  • We take the view that there should be a system of cross-checks of schedules and mechanisms through actions influencing biodiversity. Such a system could pick up on those species to be either added or removed from the schedules.
  • Implementation Plans relating to the Strategy should be produced by the various stakeholders. Also the question of accountability needed to be addressed.

Paras 28-32 Enforcement and Penalties

Council notes that the levels of penalties for wildlife crimes in GB have been increased and custodial sentences introduced. Members suggest that NI should introduce changes similar to GB.

Paras 37-45

  • Proposals on increased police powers noted and rationale understood.
  • There is a need to clarify whether or not police jurisdiction at sea extends to the 12 mile limit.

Paras. 47-50

  • Council recommends that a definition of 'recklessness' is sought and included in the consultation paper.

Para. 63

  • Members are concerned that the wording in para.63 only focuses on the introduction of non-native species into the wild and did not recognise the threats from species released or escaping into the wild. We point out that the onus is on owners or any person in control to ensure that animals do not escape or are released.

Para. 65

  • Council suggests that in the case of high risk non-native species it would be, in the first instance, undesirable for such species to come into NI.

Para. 85

  • Members recognise the difficulties in setting up wildlife refuges on private land. There could be opportunity for landowners to set up their own wildlife refuge but it would be advisable to consider this in the context of agri-environment initiatives. On balance the provision should be retained.

Paras. 86-101

  • Council notes with interest and supports the inclusion of the matters outlined in these paras. for scrutiny under the consultation exercise.

Schedule 1 - Part 1

Members suggest that there should be criteria for birds with permanent nests. We also recognised that some nesting sites could be subject to development control.

  • Page 5 - delete 'petrel storm'
  • Page 8 - qualifying criteria - change 'expected to breed' to 'had bred',
  • Page 9 - Retain Lesser White Throat and Yellowhammer.

Schedule 2 - Part 2

  • Page 10 - Shoveler to stay in Schedule 1 - Code of practice should highlight constraints on shooting. Some members are concerned that the list of birds permitted for shooting needs clarification.

Schedule 2

  • Council asks that it be informed of the results of the survey on Ruddy Ducks in NI.

Schedule 5

  • The Badger should be considered as 'heavily persecuted',
  • The Common Lizard- should be considered as 'very highly localised'.

Schedule 5, 6 and 7

  • We agree with all additions.

Schedule 7

  • Delete 'fox'.

Schedule 8

We suggest that the following be added Schedule 8:

Diphasiastrum alpinum alpine clubmoss; Lycopodium clavatum stag's horn clubmoss ; Carex bigelowii. These might also all qualify as representing a group of threatened species as a result of global warming.

I hope these comments are useful.

Yours sincerely

Dr Lucinda Blakiston Houston
Chairman