Accessibility |

COPFS

Protection of Wild Mammals (Scotland) Act 2002

Freedom of Information -

Protection of Wild Mammals (Scotland) Act 2002

Thank you for your e-mail of 29 January 2014 in which you requested the following information under the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 (FOISA):

“I seek information on cases involving individual(s) charged under theProtection of Wild Mammals (Scotland) Act 2002 where the individual(s) were charged with the use of dogs to hunt (flush) a fox(s) or hare where the dogs caught and killed the fox(s) or hare before an individual shot the fox (s) or hare as law requires under the 2002 Act.  I would like to know how many cases match my request and in particular information relating to cases where an individual(s) was charged but not convicted and the reason(s) why they were not convicted.

  • All cases relating to the content of my description, from 2011-12
  • All cases relating to the content of my description which led to a successful prosecution 2011-12
  • All cases relating to the content of my description which failed to secure a prosecution and more importantly, why the cases failed to achieve a prosecution 2011-2012”

We have now completed our search for the information you request, and can report as follows:



Firstly, in relation to the criteria of your request Section 1(1) is the relevant Section of the Act.  I should explain that not all cases reported under Section 1(1) of the Protection of Wild Mammals (Scotland) Act 2002 involve foxes or hares and many do not result in a kill. I can inform you that there were two cases which met the criteria of your request received during financial year 2011/12 although in light of the circumstances in each case, the exceptions under section 2 of the 2002 Act did not apply.

Case 1: This case was carefully considered by a Specialist Prosecutor within the Wildlife and Environmental Crime Unit who concluded that there was sufficient evidence to proceed and libelled a charge of the Protection of Wild Mammals (Scotland) Act 2002, Section 1(1) with an alternate charge of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, Section 11G(i) (intentionally or recklessly kill a wild animal).  The prosecution was successful as the prosecutor accepted a plea of guilty to the alternate charge.

Case 2: This case was carefully considered by a Specialist Prosecutor within the Wildlife and Environmental Crime Unit who concluded that there was insufficient evidence to proceed with a prosecution.