§ Amendments reported (according to Order).
§ Clause 1:
§ Protection of birds according to categories.
§ (2) The expression "close season" means the period elapsing between the first day of March and the thirty-first day of August, both days being included:
§ Provided that the close season in the case of the woodcock shall be the period elapsing between the first day of February and the thirtieth day of September, both days being included.
§ THE DUKE OF BUCCLEUCH moved, in subsection (2), to leave out "August" and insert "July." The noble Duke 1393 said: My Lords, I put this Amendment down on the Committee stage, but I was very late in doing so and my noble friend the Leader of the Opposition, who is in charge of the Bill, told me that if I would put it down again he would consider the matter in the meantime. Your Lordships are aware that this Rill is to supersede all the other Acts relating to this matter. Up to the present the close time has ended on July 31. Under this Bill it is proposed to extend the close time to August 31. It is admitted that previous Acts have not been a great success, the chief reason being that they have not been generally supported and that it has thus been impossible to carry them out with the aid of the police. It is most desirable that this Bill if it is to be a success, should really be enforced, but this is possible only if it has the confidence of the public and no one can feel that it is causing hardship, grievances or an interference with existing rights.
§ I am afraid that if the close time is altered from July 31 to August 31 a great sense of grievance will be felt by many hundreds or thousands of people, and the change will be looked upon as a hardship by a great many more. For instance, it will practically prohibit the shooting of any wild duck or snipe during the month of August. There are very large numbers of the people who preserve game who shoot what are commonly called flappers, that is to say young duck, in the month of August, which, if they are not shot then, fly away, so that there is no opportunity later on. In addition, there are enormous numbers of people who during their August holiday shoot on seashores and other places where game is not preserved and where they can have their shooting practically for nothing. These people cannot afford to take expensive shootings, or, indeed, any shootings at all, but are none the less very good sportsmen, and in my opinion the Bill would have the effect of interfering with their sport.
§ I do not think that a very strong case has been made out for extending the close period, because, as your Lordships know, anyone who has a particular interest or even a particular fad wants all other interests sacrificed to it. I am convinced that if the noble Viscount is able to accept my Amendment, this Bill, instead of being detrimental to the objects which he 1394 has in view, will undoubtedly further them. The Amendment will tend to make the Bill a real success, and will enlist support for its provisions and assist the enforcement of the law instead of leaving it to be simply laughed at as it has been in the past.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 2, line 3, leave out ("August") and insert ("July").—(The Duke of Buccleuch.)
§ VISCOUNT GREY OF FALLODONMy Lords, this provision was put in the Bill because it was recommended by the Departmental Committee which made a most exhaustive and careful study of the whole question, and I am reluctant to depart from the advice given by those who have inquired into the matter. I recognise, however, that one of the two great drawbacks to the enforcement of the existing law for the protection of birds is the apathy of public opinion with regard to it. The other drawback to the existing law is its confusion and perplexity. The main object of this Bill is to remedy the objection to existing legislation, and undoubtedly we should defeat that object if we were to interfere with that which has hitherto been a legitimate form of enjoyment. It is not desired to interfere with the existing practice of shooting birds that are common, but to secure the protection of rare birds. It is very desirable that we should not raise public opinion against us by incurring any charge of that kind.
It is possible, I think, that under the noble Duke's Amendment a certain number of the rarer duck which breed comparatively late may be sacrificed, but on the other hand it is undoubtedly true, as he says, that a good deal of shooting of common wild duck and of snipe goes on in August, and is the only form of sport open to people who cannot have private shootings of their own. I propose, therefore, to accept the noble Duke's Amendment. I would point out that in some places, such as the Farne Islands, there exist breeding grounds where there are practically no birds fit for food but where shooting might take place, although it is very desirable that there should be no shooting at such breeding grounds. But such places may be preserved under the Bill by being declared sanctuaries For these reasons I am prepared to accept the Amendment.
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ THE DUKE OF BUCCLEUCH moved to omit the proviso to subsection (2). The noble Duke said: My Lords, this Amendment relates to the woodcock. At the present time, for some reason or other, the woodcock is specially selected over all the birds in Schedule I for special preservation. One great advantage of this Bill is, I think, that the number of birds in the various Schedules has been considerably reduced, as compared with former Bills, or rather as compared with the lists which the county councils have prepared and which have been approved by the Home Office in England and by the Secretary for Scotland. The result of having those long lists of birds is that the general public have regarded them with indifference. The numbers have been considerably curtailed in this Bill and it seems to me that unless a very strong case can be made out it is a great mistake to give one bird particular protection.
§ Another reason against this is that, certainly in my part of the world, and I believe more or less throughout Scotland and largo portions of England, woodcock breeding is increasing, and has been increasing continuously for many years. I know it may be said that in certain counties the shooting of woodcock has been prohibited before October 1. I know of three counties with which I had particularly to deal. In the case of two of those counties it was found to be absurd, and was dropped, and in the third, although the prohibition has been continued, as a matter of fact every one shot the bird regularly. I admit that there is not much enjoyment in shooting the woodcock before August or September, but if you want to preserve woodcock—and no case is made out for its special preservation, because it is increasing and in no danger of extinction—it seems to me that this proviso is a bad one. There is, however, one exception as regards the proviso. And that is the prohibition of the shooting of woodcock as from the first day of February. I think that date should be retained as the beginning of the close season. The noble Viscount was so good in accepting my last Amendment that I hope he may be able to accept this one as well.
1396
§
Amendment moved—
Page 2, line 4, leave out lines 4 to 7.—(The Duke of Buccleuch.)
§ VISCOUNT GREY OF FALLODONMy Lords, the concluding words of the noble Duke in moving his Amendment are a very good illustration of the old saying that "Gratitude is an expectation of favours to come." But I should rather put it the other way, and urge that, as his first Amendment has been accepted in its entirety, the opportunity is now rather with him to be conciliatory in the Amendment he has now moved. The object of the proviso is to encourage woodcock as a British breeding species. It is true that in many parts of the country it does breed, and is doing so with increasing frequency, and that it does show a tendency to extend its breeding range south. That is, I think, a tendency to encourage, and it will not be encouraged if there is a great deal of shooting of woodcock when the foreign birds are not in this country at all and the only birds destroyed will be British breeding birds. The British breeding birds have much more chance of surviving if shooting does not begin until the foreign birds have arrived.
The noble Duke suggested that it might be well to keep February 1 as the date on which the close season should begin. I should like to meet him as far as I can. I am a little impressed by his argument that the breeding of woodcock as a British breeding species does depend upon the interest of owners, and that they will not be so ready to preserve them on their estates if shooting is not allowed until October 1. I think there is some force in the argument, and therefore I propose to the noble Duke that for the words "the thirtieth day of September" he should move to substitute the words" the thirty-first day of August."
THE DUKE OF BUCCLEUCHI am quite willing to accept the suggested Amendment, and I will move it accordingly.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 2, line 6, leave out ("the thirtieth day of September" and insert ("the thirty-first day of August").—(The Duke, of Buccleuch.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
1397§ Special provisions with respect to the lapwing.
§ (3) On and after the first day of May in any year, a person shall not sell for human consumption or have in his possession for the purpose of sale for human consumption any eggs of the lapwing, and if any person acts in contravention of this provision, he shall be guilty of an offence against this Act.
§ THE DUKE OF BUCCLEUCH moved in subsection (3) to leave out "first day of May" and insert "twentieth day of April" The noble Duke said: My Lords, this Amendment has reference to the lapwing. This Bill very wisely places the date after which the eggs of the lapwing shall not be taken as late as April 15, and the noble Viscount informed your Lordships that this had been fixed cm because it was not very desirable in many places to encourage the sitting on early eggs by reason of the fact that agriculture might be in operation and if a roller or harrow should happen to go over the nests there would not be much left of them. It may be disputed whether the fifteenth of April is the best date, but I am aware that it is generally accepted as a most suitable date. If the collecting of eggs after April 15 is prohibited, to which, I understand, there is no objection, the danger appears to me to be that those who wish to obey the law will not collect them after April 15, but a very large number of others will, and the only safeguard to prevent people from taking an undue number of plovers' eggs is to prohibit the sale.
§ I will give your Lordships an instance. On my own property the collection of plovers' eggs is prohibited in one county. I and other proprietors and other occupiers have not collected them, but other people have, and every single egg has been swept off the place, even up to a much later date than is indicated in the Bill. That was because the sale of eggs was allowed. My Amendment would give five days in which to sell the eggs that have been collected, and I think that would be sufficient. I feel certain that if plovers' eggs are allowed to be sold until May I the eggs will be collected up to April 28 or 29.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 4, line 8, leave out ("first day of May") and insert ("twentieth day of April").—(The Bake of Buccleuch.)
§ VISCOUNT GREY OF FALLODONMy Lords, this is an Amendment designed to strengthen the Bill, and undoubtedly the noble Duke is quite right in saying that the protection of the lapwing really depends upon prohibiting the sale of its eggs. In that category it stands alone among birds. Unless the sale is prohibited undoubtedly the taking of eggs will go on, whatever the law may be. The lapwing is a bird considered so useful that some counties—my own county Northumberland is, I think, one of them—protect now, under the existing law, the bird and its eggs during the whole year. The bird is considered to be entirely beneficial—not only innocent in doing no harm, but active in doing good, from the farmer's point of view. The number of lapwings in this country has, as far as my information goes, diminished enormously, and that is very largely because we do not get the enormous flocks of migratory birds in the autumn that used to come. I think the reason for that is the tremendous demand for their eggs both here and in other countries. Therefore, the prohibition of the sale of eggs may be helpful in preserving the birds, and in increasing the numbers that we may expect to have in the autumn.
The only hesitation I had in accepting the Amendment was that if we made the provision about the sale too stringent we might raise a good deal of opposition to the Bill, and jeopardise its chances of passing. But, having accepted the noble Duke's opinion on the first Amendment as to the probability of rousing opposition, I am prepared to accept his opinion on this that there is no real danger of wrecking the Bill. Therefore, being most desirous to see the Bill as effective as possible, I will gladly accept his Amendment.
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 7:
§ Offences of cruelty.
§ 7.—(1) A person shall not—
- (a) affix, place or set on any pole, tree, or cairn of stones or earth, any spring, trap, gin or other similar instrument calculated to cause bodily injury to any bird coming in contact therewith; or
- (b) knowingly permit or suffer or cause any such instrument to be so affixed, placed, or set; or
- (c) take or attempt to take any bird by means of a hook or other similar instrument; or
- (d) use as a decoy any braced or tethered bird, or maimed or blinded bird; or
- (e) use bird lime for the purpose of taking birds.
§ THE DUKE OF BUCCLEUCH moved, in subsection (1) (a), to leave out "or earth." The noble Duke said: My Lords, I do not wish to press this Amendment, but I would point out that under these words it might perhaps be illegal to set a rabbit trap or snare for rabbits. Perhaps the noble Viscount has not considered this point.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 5, line 25, leave out ("or earth").—(The Duke of Buccleuch.)
§ VISCOUNT GREY OF FALLODONAs a matter of fact, these words were not drafted for the purposes of this Bill. They are taken from an Act passed in 1904, prohibiting the setting of traps of this kind. They are taken textually from that Act, so that they really come to us with the settled wisdom of Parliament behind them. But I am not disposed to think that the wisdom of Parliament is always infallible, and, having examined the words closely, I do think there is some force in the noble Duke's criticism, and I suggest that the noble Duke's point, which I think is a real one, might be met by inserting "mound of" before earth, so that instead of "earth" it may be "mound of earth."
THE EARL OF CRAWFORDWhat is a mound of earth? A mound of earth may be anything. It may be as small as a mole heap, or as big as Fujiyama.
§ VISCOUNT GREY OF FALLODONOf course, if the noble Earl objects I do not press it.
THE DUKE OF BUCCLEUCHI think it had better be reconsidered later. I beg leave to withdraw the Amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ THE DUKE OF BUCCLEUCH moved, in subsection 1 (d), to leave out "braced or tethered bird, or." The noble Duke said: Is that from an old Act?
1400THE DUKE OF BUCCLEUCHThis is a very common method of catching carrion crows, and I should very much doubt whether there is any more cruelty in tethering carrion crows than the cruelty which would be caused by the carrion crow if it were not destroyed. There may be very good reasons for having these words in, but I rather doubt whether they are quite wise.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 5, line 34, leave out ("braced or tethered bird, or").—(The Duke of Buccleuch.)
§ VISCOUXT GREY OF FALLODONMy Lords, it is not, I think, specially for the carrion crow that these words are used. Bird catchers use braced or tethered birds very much as decoys for catching the small birds which are perfectly harmless, and I am told, though I have not got the instances here, that police court reports show that a certain amount of cruelty and injury to the birds has taken place from the practice of bracing or tethering them. The word "tethered" was added here on the recommendation of the Scottish advisory committee or the Scottish Office, and, as there has been a certain amount of cruelty, and as there are other ways of destroying carrion crows and noxious birds, besides bracing or tethering them, and further, as the bracing or tethering is mainly used for birds of a much more innocent description, I would ask the noble Duke not to press his Amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Second Schedule (Birds in Category II (specially protected during the close season)):
§ THE DUKE OF BUCCLEUCH moved to leave out "Duck (all species)." The noble Duke said: So far as I can make out from the Bill, nobody will be allowed to take ducks, or sell or eat their eggs. Of course, that is not intended. I notice that later on the words are used "Wild goose (all species)." If we said "Wild duck (all species)" it would meet the point.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 11, line 22, leave out ("Duck (all species)").—(The Duke of Buccleuch.)
§ VISCOUNT GREY OF FALLODONThe word "wild," I think, clearly ought to be inserted before "duck," but, as the title is "Wild Birds Protection Bill," I am not sure that it would have the effect which the noble Duke fears on domestic ducks. As we say "wild goose" we ought to say "wild duck." I therefore suggest that we insert the word "wild" before "duck," and then the words can stand "Wild duck (all species)."
THE EARL OF CRAWFORDI am not quite clear about this. As the Bill stands the expression "bird" means any wild bird, but does not include any game bird. The expression "wild bird" is not to be found in the Bill at all except in the title, in the Definition Clause, and in the recommendation for setting up these advisory committees. I do not see where the definition of wildness comes in. If yon put "wild duck" into the Schedule here it would give a safeguard in regard to the farmyard duck, and unless something of the kind is done I think I am correct in saying that the Bill would bar the slaughter of any duck in any farmyard. But I am more concerned about the eggs. The Second Schedule comprises birds which are protected not only themselves but as to their nests and eggs during the close season. That is Category 2 and it applies to everybody; there is no limitation in favour of the owner or occupier. If this Bill passes into law as it stands now it will be illegal to exchange a clutch of wild ducks' eggs. I look upon that process as the most profitable and fruitful way of extending and increasing wild duck in this country. I know districts in this country in which there was not a wild duck ten years ago where there are now plenty, as the result of the judicious exchange of clutches of eggs. That is barred by the Second Schedule, so far as I can see, and I think it is another example of this Bill going too far simply through people being too zealous in maintaining high ideals.
§ VISCOUNT GREY OF FALLODONAs a matter of fact, under the existing law, I believe, an owner or occupier may not shoot wild geese or wild ducks in the close season any more than he may shoot partridges or pheasants, so that they are fully protected.
§ VISCOUNT GREY OF FALLODONThe birds are protected. Therefore if wild duck and wild geese were struck out of Category 2, they would be liable to be shot all the year round by owners and occupiers promiscuously, and they would be in a worse position than they are at present.
§ VISCOUNT GREY OF FALLODONYes; therefore, I think it is absolutely necessary to retain the birds in Category 2. In regard to exchanges of eggs, that is a very desirable thing to be done. It is done under the Game Laws as regards pheasants and partridges now, though I do not know under what provision of the Game Laws it is done. I should think that it might be done under this Bill by getting a licence from the Scottish Office or the Home Office, and that there would be no difficulty in obtaining a licence for the purpose. I think it is essential to leave wild ducks and wild geese in Category 2 in order that they may have proper protection. If the point as to the exchange of eggs is not met by the powers of licence in the Bill, there will be an opportunity of considering that point and of having it dealt with in another place. I quite admit it is very desirable that such exchanges should take place.
THE EARL OF CRAWFORDI am much obliged, and if the noble Viscount will look into the matter before the Bill is dealt with elsewhere I shall be satisfied. As Clause 6 stands the object of the licence is the protection of property, crops and fisheries. It is all very fine to say that I have to go to Whitehall and put down a fifty pound note and get a guarantor and I do not know what. Then it may be three months before they answer my letter, and by that time it will not be very much good changing clutches of eggs.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
1403§ VISCOUNT GREY OF FALLODON moved to insert "Wild" before "Duck (all species)." The noble Viscount said: I beg to move the Amendment which I mentioned in the course of the discussion on the last Amendment moved by the noble Duke.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 11, line 32, insert ("Wild") before ("Duck Call species)").—(Viscount Grey of Fallodon.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ THE DUKE OF BUCCLEUCH moved to leave out "Wild Goose (all species)." The noble Duke said: My Lords, there are certain places in the counties of Fife and Perth where the wild geese remain, I am informed, until the end of April and do damage to the crops. Under the Bill the wild goose is protected from March I onward, so that those birds may damage the crops with impunity. I have no knowledge of this myself, but parts of the land in question is, I believe, the property of my noble friend Lord Crawford. On the Committee Stage of the Bill the noble Viscount the Leader of the Opposition said that he would look into this matter and I think probably he will be able to dispel the fears of those who think they would have no remedy except under a licence which is, apparently, rather difficult and expensive to obtain. I have no doubt my noble friend the Secretary for Scotland will give all necessary facilities for obtaining those licences, and I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 11, line 36, leave out ("Wild Goose (all species)").—(The Duke of Buccleuch.)
§ VISCOUNT GREY OF FALLODONMy Lords, for the reasons I gave just now the acceptance of this Amendment would remove from the wild goose the protection it now enjoys. I understand that in certain parts of Scotland—I think they must be comparatively few—sufficient wild geese remain long enough in the spring to do a certain amount of damage to the crops. I do not think that damage can be very widely distributed, and it must be concentrated in one or two places where the birds congregate in numbers. Under this Bill people who have experienced such damage to their crops would apply to the Scottish Office for a licence immediately on the passing of the Bill into law. There is in existence a 1404 very expert and competent Scottish advisory committee with whose chairman I have, as a matter of fact, discussed the matter, and I am sure that if a licence was applied for on the ground that damage had been done in previous years, it would be readily given to the owner or occupier, so that he might protect his crops by shooting the wild geese that attacked them. I think the Bill gives protection now. In fact, by giving the owners and occupiers power to shoot the birds in Category 3 and enabling a licence to be given it does more in some ways for the protection of crops than the existing law. I hope the noble Duke will not press his Amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Third Schedule: