• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Uk Wildlife Trust find new species of Rabbit (1 Viewer)

Found this one really interesting if not rather sad..http://ofpiesandbirds.blogspot.co.uk/. I am sure that the badger photo could be a springwatch favourite;). Is this possibly the worst ever miss id of a well known wildlife species?

I entered 'hare coursing' into the Sheffield & Rotherham Trust search facility, but there were no hits; however, I was asked "Did you mean 'share courting'?"
:eek!:

Now surely, the person who made this 'well-meaning' ID should be named and asked for their reasoning and logic, because otherwise the reported comment is 'bearing false witness'; if it had come to court, that statement could be taken as perjury or considered as testimony of the most inexpert witness possible...

If it is incontrovertible that a 'responsible person' (as defined possibly by the Charity Commissioners) has made such a statement on behalf of the S&RT Trust, then the reputation of the Trust has been badly damaged.
MJB:-C
 
Last edited:
A decent guy tries to do something positive against cruelty and it ends up like that, pathetic!.
 
Surely if thrown out of court on a misrepresentation by a called in 'expert', then surely this could be challenged, no?
 
I note that hares have featured on the front cover of the wildlife trusts magazine..

Perhaps if this thread were transferred or cross-referred to the Yorkshire thread (that may already have been done, of course), the Yorkshire BirdForum contingent might be able to do some digging. Perhaps the Yorkshire media might relish embarrassing the CPS, too?
MJB
 
Warning! This thread is more than 12 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top