League Against Cruel Sports

wildfowler1

Well-Known Member
Following on from my post yesterday, SNARES. (FYI)
This is what, in a nutshell, that I received at work as I assume other Councils have around the Country.
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST ON THE USE OF SNARES TO TRAP ANIMALS.
I have been asked to respond to the following questions:

1.Are snares in use or permitted on council land?
2.Does the council have any policy to either prohibit or regulate their use?
3.Please could you send a copy of this policy to the League?
4.Would the council consider meeting with a League representative to discuss the use of snares on council land?
The leagues website for this is :http://www.league.org.uk/SnaresManifesto.
Wf1
 
Feel bad for you WF1, but unfortunately FOI requests work both ways....

However, the use of snares in England is still legal... the questions are not that intrusive ( although we all know why they want the information ) BUT, rather than put up defences, it could be an opportunity to `show them the light`, on how / why, well conducted `Best Practise` snaring is a valid policy for councils to follow - especially in some urban areas, where vermin is a horrendous problem...

"He who dares, Rodney"....:british:

All the best.

Neil.
 
Last edited:
The both ways thing may also being worth mentioning how about asking Lacs how much cash the "may " contributes to them annually ?
Regards
​norma
 
Reading the PDF quickly I think this may be a case of batoning down the hatches for an on-coming storm.
It states that the councils in Scotland have already banned the use of snares on their land and I would imagine the request for information to English councils will be used to mount a campaign to get it stopped on their land as well.
There will be little resistance from councils run by certain parties so they(The LACS) may well get their way easily in some areas unfortunately
 
perdix. Thanks for that response that is the reason for me posting. It may well be the time to speak to Local Councilors,while it is still at this level.Wf1
 
Wildfowler1 - in this case I would wholeheartedly recommend that you consider refusal to supply the information under S38

Given the status of LACS, and the risk of animal rights protests based upon the possibility of a positive reply, then this would result in a risk to the health and safety of any council employees or contractors involved in wildlife management, and as such there is an exemption within FOI

http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/information-access-rights/foi/foi-exemption-s38.pdf

Specifically lays out an exemption under s38 where the disclosure would or would be likely to endanger the health and safety of employees and in the case of disclosures which:

would allow individuals, groups or firms to be identified orlocated and consequently targeted and attacked for their beliefs orpractices, including work in controversial scientific areas;

Hope that helps.
 
Labrat.Thanks very much I'm on it ,will get our legals going today.Very helpful. It looks like a case of be damned if you do and be damned if you don't. Wf1
 
I agree with Labrat in that you should consider a refusal however be advised that the FOI Act has a presumption of release of information unless there is good reason not to and the number of exceptions is fairly limited. If you decide not to release the information LACS have the option of referring the matter to the Information Commissioner who will adjudicate and either instruct you to release the information (or some of it) or uphold your decision to withhold the information. If you decide or are required to answer the request you only have to answer the questions as put and as far as I can see, apart from No. 3 they only require a "Yes" or "No" answer - don't volunteer anything else. Question 4 is not actually a request for information and you may not have to answer it even if you answer the others but if you do I would suggest that you answer "No" to No.4 as they cannot use this legislation to force a meeting only to ask for information.

On further reflection I would refuse to have a meeting on the grounds that snaring is not viewed as a sport and that consequently LACS is not an appropriate organisation to consult with, BACS or the RSPCA would be more appropriate if advice was needed.
 
Last edited:
paul k. Thanks we have taken your route, easiest option and I have taken onboard excellent advice. Thanks Labrat I no doubt will use your information at some point with other chancers.Wf1
 
Feel bad for you WF1, but unfortunately FOI requests work both ways....

However, the use of snares in England is still legal... the questions are not that intrusive ( although we all know why they want the information ) BUT, rather than put up defences, it could be an opportunity to `show them the light`, on how / why, well conducted `Best Practise` snaring is a valid policy for councils to follow - especially in some urban areas, where vermin is a horrendous problem...

"He who dares, Rodney"....:british:

All the best.

Neil.

Neil

Very good intentions there but in rality animal rights organisations are fanatical and will never, ever listen to reason. Anyone who has any dealings with any such organisation should understand that they are looking to manipulate everything they say to further their cause. Be suspicious and on your guard at all times.
 
Exactly, that's why I recommend complete refusal, as they could now follow up with further questions that it is now very difficult to refuse. I am confident that a refusal on this basis is robust and as we used regularly on animal research data. e
 
I just read their pdf - I may just email them with a thankyou, for helping me to keep legal with my snaring activities, and for providingme with photographs of legay used fenn traps, which I had never previously thought of using!
 
I am not familiar with the league of cruel sports though I have heard of it obviously, not for a long while now i must say,how do they class something as cruel and why is is categorised as a sport, what makes it a sport.
 
Absolutely anyone can request information from any public body or body funded by public funds, all they have to have is a postal address and this doesn't even need to be in the UK. The body receiving the request then have to answer two questions 1) do they have the information and 2) if they do, can they release it?

If they don't have the information then that's the end of the process, if they do and none of the legal reasons for not disclosing apply, then the information is released.

LACS can therefore ask these questions and like journalists who now heavily rely on FOI for stories, you can be sure their reasons for asking the questions are purely to promote their agenda, that's their raison d'être, but knowing that is not a good reason to refuse.

So, as I have said, the request either has to be rejected for one of the permitted reasons or the questions need to be answered as posed, in this case they are simple "yes" or "no" answers and a request for a document, the last question is a request for a meeting that is not a FOI question and should not be answered at all on the grounds that is not a FOI question and not because of any perception about LACS's motivation.

They will then presumably write in again to try and get a meeting and you are free to refuse on whatever grounds you see fit but the best would seem to be that the council does not not regard snaring as a sport or cruel and that therefore see no benefit in meeting with LACS as there are more appropriate organisations to seek advice from should that ever be required. All of the issues with the meeting are outside the remit of FOI and you should not be drawn into arguments around FOI in respect of the meeting.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top