Magpie has rights too, judge rules

Malcolm Ogilvie CONservation hooligan often advocates the trapping and
slaughter of corvids, one of his nazi style pet hates.
It would seem the law is helping old Mags out a little. RSPB, Woodland
Trust etc regularly trap and kill corvids too, next time you see a
trap, keep an eye on it and make sure they comply with the law. Better
still let the birds go and smash the trap.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Magpie has rights too, judge rules
By Nicola Woolcock
(Filed: 01/07/2003)


Magpies have legal rights and should not be made to suffer without
good reason, the High Court ruled yesterday.

The RSPCA successfully appealed against a judge's refusal to convict
Norman Shinton of causing unnecessary suffering to a magpie.

Mr Shinton kept the bird in a trap in his garden in Telford,
Shropshire, as a lure to catch and kill other magpies. He claimed that
it was a way of protecting songbirds' eggs and chicks from the
magpies.

But he was accused of causing unnecessary suffering by using it for at
least five days.

Mr Justice Leveson allowed the RSPCA appeal against a Telford judge's
refusal to convict, although Mr Shinton was using the trap under
licence.

He was told that an RSPCA inspector found the bird dirty and covered
with a greasy film, with primary wing feathers broken and injuries to
its claws, in July 2000.

It was in a small Larsen trap, a device with a spring-loaded door, and
could not stretch its wings. It looked as if it had been confined for
several weeks.

Mr Justice Leveson said that Mr Shinton, a member of the British
Association for Shooting and Conservation, was authorised to confine
the magpie under the 1981 Wildlife and Countryside Act.

But he said that Philip Browning, the Telford district judge, was
wrong to clear him of causing the bird unnecessary suffering. Although
the trap might be lawful, it was "illogical" to say that its owner had
no responsibility.

"It is impossible to say that this bird did not suffer unnecessarily,"
he said. "I do not accept that the trapped bird being lawfully used
demonstrates that an offence under the 1911 Protection of Animals Act
cannot be made out."

The judge said it was not necessary for the case to be reconsidered,
as the RSPCA had brought it only to clarify the law.

The RSPCA described Larsen traps as "inherently cruel", adding: "There
is no evidence that magpies have a significant effect on the songbird
population."

--




















So, you dont like reasoned,
well thought out, civil debate?

I understand.

/´¯/)
/¯../
/..../
/´¯/'...'/´¯¯`·¸
/'/.../..../......./¨¯\
('(...´...´.... ¯~/'...')
\.................'...../
''...\.......... _.·´
\..............(
\.............\..

"Malcolm" <Malcolm DeleteThis @malcsplace.com> wrote in message
news:a9c4850d2c5e30c867f9f6be1119973a@free.teranews.com...
> Malcolm Ogilvie CONservation hooligan often advocates the trapping
and
> slaughter of corvids, one of his nazi style pet hates.
> It would seem the law is helping old Mags out a little. RSPB,
Woodland
> Trust etc regularly trap and kill corvids too, next time you see a
> trap, keep an eye on it and make sure they comply with the law.
Better
> still let the birds go and smash the trap.
>

Advocating criminal damage now...........