System 'failing' on wildlife crime

Published on Saturday 6 March 2010 19:20

POLICE forces in Scotland have been accused of failing to tackle wildlife crime after it was revealed that just 24 cases of illegal killing of birds of prey have been taken to court in five years.

Out of 157 cases involving killing the birds – including golden eagles, red kites and hen harriers – just 15 per cent have resulted in court action.

And the average penalty for a crime linked to persecution of birds of prey was just 240, despite the maximum penalty being raised to 10,000 or a year in jail.

The figures have been compiled by the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds. Duncan Orr-Ewing, head of species at RSPB Scotland, described the level of penalties as "shocking" and called for prison sentences to be handed out to act as a deterrent.

He accused police forces of failing to implement recommendations made by the Scottish Government two years ago in a review of wildlife crime, including that each force should have a full-time wildlife crime officer.

RSPB figures of every crime against birds of prey from 2003 to 2008 show more than 264 were killed illegally. Out of these, 183 were poisoned and another 81 were killed by other illegal means, such as by nest destruction, shooting or traps. But just 24 cases ended up in court.

Of those which did result in legal action, nine out of ten culminated in a guilty verdict. But, the RSPB points out, penalties have usually been less than 500. The most serious cases could be punished by jail terms, yet, according to the RSPB, the culprits have regularly been let off with community service orders.

The highest penalty was a 2,500 fine, for a case involving the poisoning of more than 20 birds.

Orr-Ewing said:

"We are not suggesting everybody should be sent to jail but we do believe this would send out a serious signal if somebody was jailed for one of the more serious cases."

He added that the implementation by police forces of the Scottish Government recommendations had been "painfully slow."

"Police forces see other crimes as more important," he said.

"We are not denying that some of the human crimes are very important but a message has been sent out by government and the public that wildlife crime should be treated as any other crime and we would expect the same standards to apply."

He says it is "embarrassing" that Scotland does not take the issue more seriously. "It does affect our reputation. I was at a recent conference in France when red kites were discussed. They are doing poorly across most of Europe.

"We have to explain that in Scotland there are still people illegally killing them and using banned poisons. People find that very hard to grasp."

Despite the Scottish Government's recommendations in its review, just two police forces – Fife and Grampian – have a full-time wildlife crime officer.

The species protection officer at RSPB Scotland, Ian Thomson, said another concern was a lack of specialist knowledge among fiscals.

"Some of these cases are defended by top QCs and prosecuted by non-specialist fiscals," he said. "All the QC has to do is sow seeds of doubt and it may lead to a not guilty verdict."

Deputy Chief Constable Iain MacLeod, of Central Scotland Police, is the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland lead for wildlife crime. He said that the majority of the recommendations in the 2008 review had been implemented and police forces were working towards the remainder.

"There are occasions where forces may have to prioritise investigations as situations and incidents develop," he said. "But the police will investigate and record all crimes.

"We recognise there is frustration as some investigated crimes do not always result in a prosecution.

"Police forces will continue to work in conjunction with their partners to prevent and reduce wildlife crime across Scotland"

A Scottish Government spokeswoman said wildlife crime was viewed as "a crime against Scotland itself" and never before had it been so high on the political agenda.

She said: "These crimes carry with them the risk of heavy fines and prison sentences and we are working with the Partnership for Action Against Wildlife Crime to support innovative ways of combating, detecting and prosecuting those responsible."