Petition to try to save Britain's National Wildlife Crime Unit (1 Viewer)

[Mike Crawley]

sincerest apologies if this in the wrong forum but...

please click and sign

 

[tperry]

I've signed and also emailed my MP asking him to sign the "Early Day Motion No. 603" - usual automated response from MP although he does sometimes respond by letter later on.

 

[John Cantelo]

Done! I also emailed my (Tory) MP but have had no response yet,

 

[angusmcoatup]

Signed and about to e-mail.

 

[Stevie babe]

Done

 

[John Cantelo]

I hope the lack of comments isn't reflected in a poor sign-up rate. This is important folks! Still no response from my local MP ...

 

[grobble]

Done. Let's hope it works.

 

[etudiant]

Would it not be preferable to find out first whether this body is actually worth having?
As an American, I have no dog in this fight, but this site is replete with horror stories of raptor poisoning and nest robbing, instances in which this unit shines by its complete absence. So what do they actually do that is useful?

 

[Wildmoreway]

Would it not be preferable to find out first whether this body is actually worth having?
As an American, I have no dog in this fight, but this site is replete with horror stories of raptor poisoning and nest robbing, instances in which this unit shines by its complete absence. So what do they actually do that is useful?

The problem is extensive wildlife crime and limited resources to fight it but rest assured the wildlife crime units do appear to do as much as they can.

 

[John Cantelo]

Got a lengthy, but obscure reply from my MP. He failed to mention the early day motion or the crisis in funding, but insisted the government was wonderful and cared about these things!

 

[barontan2418]

Signed with pleasure.

 

[Nightranger]

More to stimulate discussion than anything...why do we need a National Wildlife Crime Unit? Wildlife crime is what it says on the tin (unless Cameron and Clegg have now re-written that slogan) and every force should be aware of the laws. Is parking/drugs/theft/rape/mugging/smuggling/drunkeness law separate in that it needs a separate unit to deal with it. The truth is rather more basic in that the police are too busy dealing with social crimes to dedicate time to wildlife (unless we have a reality TV wildlife crime unit special in the near future)). No political party is going to commit money to 'mere animals' when scroungers are lying unwashed and hungover in their beds nearby...

..apart from those that are on their local patch (reluctantly) enjoying the chance for unfettered bird watching.

 

[Farnboro John]

More to stimulate discussion than anything...why do we need a National Wildlife Crime Unit? Wildlife crime is what it says on the tin (unless Cameron and Clegg have now re-written that slogan) and every force should be aware of the laws. Is parking/drugs/theft/rape/mugging/smuggling/drunkeness law separate in that it needs a separate unit to deal with it. The truth is rather more basic in that the police are too busy dealing with social crimes to dedicate time to wildlife (unless we have a reality TV wildlife crime unit special in the near future)). No political party is going to commit money to 'mere animals' when scroungers are lying unwashed and hungover in their beds nearby...

..apart from those that are on their local patch (reluctantly) enjoying the chance for unfettered bird watching.

A National Wildlife Crime Unit, in addition to being able to chase eggers across the nation instead of losing interest and expertise as they most inconveniently cross force boundaries, would, one fervently hopes, be composed of officers sufficiently detached from the local masons/rotarians to pursue the aristocracy's keepers regardless of worries about getting an invite to the next shoot.

It might just have a sense of justice.

No wonder the current government has it in its sights.

John

 

[etudiant]

A National Wildlife Crime Unit, in addition to being able to chase eggers across the nation instead of losing interest and expertise as they most inconveniently cross force boundaries, would, one fervently hopes, be composed of officers sufficiently detached from the local masons/rotarians to pursue the aristocracy's keepers regardless of worries about getting an invite to the next shoot.

It might just have a sense of justice.

No wonder the current government has it in its sights.

John

Interesting. I had no idea that the UK law enforcement was so fragmented.
It is surprising that it would take something as relatively minor as wildlife crime to get recognition as a national problem. Surely there is lots of other malfeasance that needs dealing with on more than a local basis.

 

[Farnboro John]

The traditional British dislike of centralisation of authority is one thing that has led to retention of county/regional/metropolitan police forces answerable to local government not national. There are national task forces for a number of varieties of crime e.g. the serious and organised crime agency (which I think has just been renamed/relaunched).

John

 

[etudiant]

The traditional British dislike of centralisation of authority is one thing that has led to retention of county/regional/metropolitan police forces answerable to local government not national. There are national task forces for a number of varieties of crime e.g. the serious and organised crime agency (which I think has just been renamed/relaunched).

John

So who enforces the national pollution laws in a town that depends on the polluting enterprise? Is there some sort of roving inspectorate?
I feel I'm learning more about the basis of Welsh separatism on BF than from The Economist.

 

[Farnboro John]

So who enforces the national pollution laws in a town that depends on the polluting enterprise? Is there some sort of roving inspectorate?
I feel I'm learning more about the basis of Welsh separatism on BF than from The Economist.

I'm no expert, and you might try the law pages of e.g. the Telegraph or the Guardian for a head-spinning introduction to British legalese, but here's a bit more.

In the UK, Criminal Law (apart from bye-laws about local things like not riding bicycles in parks) arises from national statute and the collected amount of case law from over a thousand years of common law judgements.

Enforcement of aspects of national statutes such as pollution legislation may be by a whole bunch of bodies especially where expertise is essential, but enforciing criminal law is the job of the police. Each force has the same duties in that respect on their own patch, though the fragmentation of the Union is creating variations. So each police force deals with nationally defined offences locally.

One reason disputees settle "out of court" can be to avoid creating a legal precedent in common law, that could in future be used as a reference for similar disputes: especially if they think many of these might also be directed at them.

I hope this is roughly right and interesting.

John

 

[etudiant]

I'm no expert, and you might try the law pages of e.g. the Telegraph or the Guardian for a head-spinning introduction to British legalese, but here's a bit more.

In the UK, Criminal Law (apart from bye-laws about local things like not riding bicycles in parks) arises from national statute and the collected amount of case law from over a thousand years of common law judgements.

Enforcement of aspects of national statutes such as pollution legislation may be by a whole bunch of bodies especially where expertise is essential, but enforciing criminal law is the job of the police. Each force has the same duties in that respect on their own patch, though the fragmentation of the Union is creating variations. So each police force deals with nationally defined offences locally.

One reason disputees settle "out of court" can be to avoid creating a legal precedent in common law, that could in future be used as a reference for similar disputes: especially if they think many of these might also be directed at them.

I hope this is roughly right and interesting.

John

Very informative. Thank you. Seems the UK has found a different route to the same result: full employment for lawyers. :king:

 

[Farnboro John]

Very informative. Thank you. Seems the UK has found a different route to the same result: full employment for lawyers. :king:

What has really messed us up (and given lawyers far too much to do) is nanny government moving further and further from making people responsible for their own decisions and safety, thereby creating a blame culture.

Among the presumably unintended consequences has been the removal of dead wood from habitats to prevent some human having stuff fall on them, thus dehoming assorted wildlife.

John

 

[etudiant]

What has really messed us up (and given lawyers far too much to do) is nanny government moving further and further from making people responsible for their own decisions and safety, thereby creating a blame culture.

Among the presumably unintended consequences has been the removal of dead wood from habitats to prevent some human having stuff fall on them, thus dehoming assorted wildlife.

John

Tell me about it.
Here in NYC the Central Park Conservancy, a private charity, basically runs Central Park, as they contribute close to 90% of the total spending.
They have gone on a tree removal rampage, much accelerated since 2011, when there were two tragic deaths from falling tree limbs. Since then, the tree count in the park has gone from 25,000 to about 18,000, with primarily the larger trees the victims. While larger trees are more likely to have damaged limbs, the Conservancy policy, probably guided by liability lawyers, appears to be that the safest pruning is six inches above the ground, no higher. This applies whether the tree overshadows a path or stands in the middle of a grove. Trees that survived hurricane Sandy are no match for the Conservancy lawyers, unfortunately.