LICENSED beaver killings have been ordered to halt and previous culls authorised by a Scottish Government agency have been deemed unlawful in a court ruling.
Trees for Life sought a judicial review claiming NatureScot is breaking the law by failing to make the killing of beavers a last resort when land management is required.
The charity is calling for the protected species to be relocated to other parts of Scotland rather than culled. A Court of Session judge ruled that by not issuing written reasons for granting licences to kill beavers, NatureScot has been unlawful.
In a written judgment published yesterday, Lady Carmichael said: “The first respondent [NatureScot] has a general practice of issuing licences without giving reasons for doing so. In approaching matters on the basis that it has no duty to give reasons for granting a licence, the first respondent has erred in law.
READ MORE: Four men charged after wildlife crime probe in rural Scotland
“The contention is that the licences should have been reviewed and revoked because they should never have been issued in the first place.”
The court ruled NatureScot must set out openly and fully the reasons why it believes any future licence to kill beavers should be granted.
Out of the five complaints issued by Trees for Life under consideration by the court, four were rejected.
Lady Carmichael added that she was “not satisfied” with some of the arguments put forward by Trees for Life about NatureScot’s “generalised unlawful practices”, adding, “in a number of instances their [Trees for Life] criticisms are misconceived”.
Alan McDonnell, Trees for Life conservation manager, said: “The Scottish Government must take this ruling seriously, and it means that from here on in there can be no more rubber-stamping of licensed killing of beavers. This is an important victory for accountability and transparency, which will benefit everyone including conservationists and farmers.”
Robbie Kernahan of NatureScot said: “We welcome the court’s decision which, for the most part, vindicates our licensing approach.
“We have been successful on all points of law except that we should have issued written reasons with each licence to explain why it had been granted.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel