MINK (IMPORTATION AND KEEPING) ORDER, 1962 (Hansard, 26 July 1962)

LORD ST. OSWALD

My Lords, I beg to move that the Mink (Importation and Keeping) Order, 1962, a copy of which was laid before your Lordships' House on June 28, be approved. I think that it will be for your Lordships' convenience if we consider this Order and the similar Order about coypus together. These two Orders are short and to the point. They extend the provisions of the Destructive Imported Animals Act, 1932, to coypus and to mink. This Act was passed to make effective the measures the Government were then taking to deal with musk rats that had escaped from fur farms and established themselves in considerable numbers over some 700 square miles in Shropshire and adjoining counties, and about 150 square miles in West Sussex, Surrey and Hampshire. The measures proved successful and by 1935 the country was virtually free of musk rats and some 3,000 had been destroyed. So far as we know, there are now no musk rats in captivity or at large in this country.

Wisely, the Act, as drawn, allows us to apply its provisions by Orders to "non-indigenous mammalian species with destructive habits". Both coypus and mink come within this class.

The main provisions of the Act are designed to prevent escapes of these creatures from captivity and to facilitate the recapture or destruction of any which do escape. Under the Order my right honourable friends the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and the Secretary of State for Scotland will be 1142 empowered to prohibit the importation or keeping of coypus and mink absolutely or to allow them in under licence. We are proposing that the importation of mink should be permitted under open general licence, because we have no wish to impede the importation of these creatures. We do not think that coypus are being imported now and a licence would be needed to import them. We are in consultation with the Fur Breeders' Association as to what conditions we should attach to licences for the keeping of mink and coypus. The Act also requires occupiers to notify the Departments of the presence of coypus and mink at large on their land. It is essential to the success of the campaign that we should know where these creatures are so that we can make sure that they are either recaptured or destroyed.

These are the main provisions of the Act and I should mention that there are penalties ranging from £5 for failure to notify the presence of coypus or mink at large, to £20 for importing or keeping them without a licence. But I should make it clear that although these powers and penalties will be available should the need arise, we hope to achieve our purpose by willing co-operation.

I should like to explain why we need these Orders. Large numbers of coypus are established in the wild in Norfolk and Suffolk and are damaging crops and waterways. These coypus were introduced into Great Britain about 1930, and by 1939 they were bred on some forty farms for their fur. When the war came most of those farms shut down and the coypus escaped. At first they did little but good by keeping down aquatic vegetation, but by 1960 farmers and river boards were complaining about the damage they were causing to river banks and crops, and particularly to sugar beet. To meet this situation, the Minister announced in July, 1960, that rabbit clearance societies in the eastern counties could claim 50 percent. grant on their expenditure on destroying coypus. These societies have been extremely active in co-operating with river boards and drainage authorities in control measures, and between them something like 100,000 coypus have been destroyed. Individual farmers, land owners and farm workers have destroyed many 1143 more. I should like to take this opportunity of paying tribute to these societies and others for their efforts against the coypus. Unfortunately, it has become clear that the present rate of destruction, heavy though it is, is not reducing numbers fast enough, and the coypus are gaining ground.

The Government have, therefore, decided that additional steps must be taken to speed up the campaign. As a "once and for all" measure we are organising a co-ordinated drive against the coypus in East Anglia under the direction of experienced officers who will work systematically over the entire area of infestation. I should make it clear that we do not consider it possible to exterminate the coypus completely, but we feel that the plans we have made will, in two or three years, enable the coypus to be reduced to really small numbers and contained in a few isolated areas. The national agricultural organisations have promised full support for the campaign and I know that we can rely on individual farmers, landowners and workers, as well as on rabbit clearance societies and other bodies, to continue their active co-openation in making the campaign a success.

Now I should say a little about mink. Mink were first farmed in Britain in 1929. There are about 600 known mink farms in Great Britain. The majority of these farms are well run and I should not wish it to be thought that this Order is in any way a reflection on the members of this industry. Nevertheless, mink have escaped in recent years and some of them are reported to be breeding in the wild on the Hampshire Avon, in Devon on the river Teign, and on the Teifi on the borders of Carmarthenshire and Cardiganshire. In the wild state these mink can do serious damage to poultry, fisheries and bird life. There is a history of similar escapes and breeding in the wild in Scandinavia where escaped mink have been allowed to increase over large areas. We feel that we should take steps to prevent this from happening in this country. I hope that I have said enough to convince your Lordships that we need these Orders to enable us to deal with the situation created by these escaped animals, and that we are proposing to use the powers reasonably and effectively. I beg to move.