Wild Mammal Persecution UK: What we do and why we do it.
Wild Mammal Persecution UK (WMPUK) is a blog set up by a number of individuals to monitor and document the persecution of wild mammals in the UK. It is intended to make people aware of our diverse and wonderful wild mammal population and the threats it faces.
We do not have an agenda to curtail certain activities UNLESS they break the law. We do not have an agenda to change the law except in circumstances where it is clear that loopholes make it extremely difficult or impossible to enforce.
We do have an agenda to draw attention to unacknowledged legal threats to our wild mammals such as the huge numbers burned alive during muirburn and killed or maimed as ‘by-catch’ in traps and snares. We do have an agenda to ensure that appropriate resources are allocated to enforcement of the law and that these resources are suitably monitored to ensure their effectiveness and impartiality. We believe strongly that the law should be enforced “without fear or favour” and we are concerned that in some cases it is not. We believe that it is a basic tenet of a democratic society that All its members, wherever they live and whatever pastimes they favour should obey the law even if they do not agree with it. Society cannot allow a pick and choose attitude to law observance or law enforcement.
We are not anti-shooting or anti-hunting but we are strongly anti-criminal.
There are many excellent groups working in the area of wildlife conservation and protection and it is not our intention to compete with them although inevitably there will be some overlap. We detail some individual cases where they have a particular relevance to a piece of legislation or the way in which it is enforced. The blog draws attention to difficulties with enforcing the relevant laws due to legislative inadequacy, limited resourcing, poor training and occasionally, lack of interest. It also suggests changes that might make enforcement more effective and predicts if and when these might happen.
We welcome visitors, guest blogs and comments, providing they are not abusive, defamatory or criminal. Come and have a look at what we have to say here.
The wild mammal population of these islands is part of our natural heritage. It belongs to us all. We have a right to enjoy it and a duty to protect it, both for ourselves and for future generations.
[registration_form]
When the officer in charge of a rural crime team tells me (protected) badgers caught in snares are Collateral Damage, I think something needs to change.
I have spent some time looking at the WMPUK site and it is certainly well intended and well written and I don’t disagree with the majority of what is published, but I do have one concern.
In this age where facts, opinions, news and alleged ‘false news’ can be spread around in minutes it is important to establish the truth of what you read. I am a retired police officer and as a birder submit wildlife records and sightings. Both those positions and many others require evidenced recording which means you need to supply information on what you see, when, where you see it and who sees it. All four of those parts enable you to make an assessment of whether the information you have in front of you is accurate and to what extent bias has crept in.
With the reporting of environmental issues at the moment I would strongly argue that the most important part of this process is knowing WHO is making the statement. Whether it is LACS, GWCT, CA, RSPB, Donald Trump, Chris Packham or a Political Party you know roughly why the statements are being made and what the person or organisation stands for.
You get a lot of pseudonyms on social media and to some degree I accept that but I believe it important that if I make a comment I put my name to it. WMPUK has set out its background and I don’t disagree with what I have read BUT there is nowhere on the website/blog that tells you who is/are the organisers and who supplies the blog entries. The blog contains both facts and opinions and it leaves an organisation open to being discredited by accusations of ‘fake news by an anonymous person’.
They’ve quite clearly said that their main objectives are to make sure the laws are being followed, as well as reporting bycatch, so I’m not sure why you’d want to know who was behind it, especially when you just know full well that they’d be targeted for abuse both online and offline. What they’re doing is very different to posting entirely fallacious opinion pieces and character assassinations, as per shooting lobby groups like C4PMC.
If you can state exactly where they’re crossing any lines, or deviating from the above statements of intent, I’d be curious to know.
I notice, that once [Mark writes: you haven’t used a valid email address. So I haven’t published your comment. ]
Nice try at censoring my reply Mark. My email is very valid.
I shall try again.
I can’t help noticing that the epidemic in illegal Hare coursing has once again not been mentioned.
Is this because there are no “toffs” involved? Or is it because the threats of violence you will receive from the perpetrators will be very real?
Chris – you mistyped your email address first time around (you put a ‘u’ where there should have been an ‘i’).
As all can now see, there is no reason to censor your first comment here.
Feel free to start your own activist group against illegal hare coursing, Chris, if you feel so passionately about it. I’d suggest you don’t really care in the slightest and it’s simply a way for you to try and deflect attention from animal cruelty/abuse that’s rife within the shooting industry.
I have just had a quick look on the website and I don’t seem to be able to see who is actually running it is it a secret or are you able to tell us please Mark
Steve M – I don’t know
Mark are you really saying you don’t know anything? Who runs or who is behind WMPUK? I am surprised given the amount of talk of fraud and false information fly about at the moment you are promoting a anonymous controversial new Org you say you know nothing about? Yet! It says on there site that RPUK are there “sister site”? Isn’t that mainly run by yours and Chris Packhams WJ co founder Ruth Tingay? Strange that! Reading some of the topics covered and how they are written many seem to follow a very familiar pattern. A long with some of the supposed “anonymous” aggressive edited ( hinting at abusive) comments on the most recent topics. Topics cover quite a bit from the time “animals”? were hung on Chris’s gate? . . . .Found the topic “Respect for the quarry” interesting. It like going back to the odd abusive names Chris was calling us on mainstream media and in the press when WJ launched. . . Though i have never felt “erotic sadistic motivation” to shoot! So i guess i must be doing it wrong? “Stalking and other varieties of shooting the acceptable form of sadism”. Amazing! Claims of “Filming shooting and releasing the of game connected to various forms pornography and domestic abuse? Fantastic! All “scientifically” proven no doubt? Crazy! . . .Can any of you recommend a good shrink.
Steve – yes I am saying that I know nothing about who runs WMPUK – nothing at all. ‘They’ emailed me asking for a guest blog and I said I’d have a look at anything they sent me – when I looked at it, it seemed interesting and perfectly suitable for publication. You are clearly interested in it – so it seems I was right.
I’d be very surprised if it is anything to do with Chris or Ruth but I haven’t asked either of them (nor indeed spoken to them about it). Are you sure you aren’t a bit obsessed by Ruth and Chris? I’m afraid you’ll have to find your own ‘shrink’ – best of luck!
What’s your full name Steve, so we’re able to judge whether your comments are worthy of being listened to? If they’re simply advocating for the law to be upheld, it makes your protestations seem rather silly and pretty telling.
Says the lady who hasn’t printed her full name
Explain to everyone exactly what is ‘controversial’ about an organisation highlighting bycatch and illegality from the hunting sector? Simply put, you don’t want any type of spotlight on your activities; I wonder why.
I haven’t printed my full name, though I’m also not the one asking for the blog to print all of their full names either, so your point is completely irrelevant @ ‘Steve M’
I suppose you’re just an ‘interested party’ and don’t either own land, run a shoot or take part in a shoot? The hypocrisy is staggering.