Jump to content

Gamekeepers, a law into themselves?

Recommended Posts

Utterly sensational title description.

Shouldn't it read, police investigate criminal damage and question 2 birds spotters on suspicion after they are seen leaving an area adjacent to where the damage occurred.

All I see reported here are 2 police officers and 2 gamekeepers doing their jobs. Snares are legal if targeted at the right species and comply with the law for humane design.

 

As for the innocent bird spotters being questioned, they must have come from the area and possibly fitted the descriptions of people seen (if anyone was). Under those circumstances it would be quite normal for a person to be questioned on suspicion. There's no difference here between this and you walking down the street where someone has reported an act of criminal damage or burglary further up the road, and you came from the area and fitted the description. Under those circumstances,. you'd be stopped in the street and questioned also.

Edited by Alsone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Alsone said:

Utter <removed> title.

Shouldn't it read, police investigate criminal damage and question 2 birds spotters on suspicion after they are seen leaving an area adjacent to where the damage occurred.

All I see reported here are 2 police officers and 2 gamekeepers doing their jobs. Snares are legal if targeted at the right species and comply with the law for humane design.

 

As for the innocent bird spotters being questioned, they must have come from the area and possibly fitted the descriptions of people seen (if anyone was). Under those circumstances it would be quite normal for a person to be questioned on suspicion. There's no difference here between this and you walking down the street where someone has reported an act of criminal damage or burglary further up the road, and you came from the area and fitted the description. Under those circumstances,. you'd be stopped in the street and questioned also.

It says the "Gamekeepers" were masked. What legitimate reason would they have for covering their faces?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, K1Machine said:

It says the "Gamekeepers" were masked. What legitimate reason would they have for covering their faces?

A very pertinent question, why indeed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, K1Machine said:

It says the "Gamekeepers" were masked. What legitimate reason would they have for covering their faces?

Maybe they were carrying out gamekeeping activites such as pest control at the time (highly likely given they were checking snares), in which case it would be quite normal to mask your face for concealment from your prey, or maybe it's the fact that they face prejudice like this that means they feel the need to hide their identities at work. 

This is typical of what anyone out carrying out pest control might wear: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Real-Tree-Camouflage-Oak-Leaf-Hunting-Balaclava-Veil-Hat-Hood-Snood-Head-Cover/292419297890?epid=8019135079&amp;hash=item44158c6262:g:dMYAAOSwn7JYD53y

Alternatively, if not in camo, they might wear plain black masks. Skin is very easily seen by animals and people from a long distance away. Hence why soldiers use makeup grease to black or camouflage their faces.

 

I think the whole idea that they put masks on just to intimidate innocent bird watchers is quite likely untrue and the kind of rubbish the OP appears to have wanted to stir from his sensational description. I very much get the feeling he doesn't like gamekeepers or the police.

The facts as I read it above, 2 gamekeepers, wearing masks as a part of their employment discovered criminal damage, they did the lawful thing and called the police. The Police found 2 people leaving the area of the damage and stopped them to question them and called the gamekeepers down to see if they could identify them. The birdwatchers weren't the people responsible so were allowed by the police to go on their way. So far as I can see there's nothing to answer here. The gamekeepers did the right thing calling the police. The police did the right thing stopping the people leaving the area and asking a few questions and in calling the gamekeepers down to identify if these were the people they'd seen or not. Would it have been better for the gamekeepers to remove their masks? Probably. But equally given this type of prejudice, it's hardly surprising if they wanted to continue to conceal their identities.
 

Edited by Alsone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not a fan of twitter, you might as well say a you overheard a guy down the pub who knows a man that....

There is however a link there to the wildsheffield article which is more informative and would have to stand up to scrutiny if untrue;

https://www.wildsheffield.com/birdwatchers-confronted-by-masked-men/

Warning - the site has some disturbing graphic photos!

I like their site, i am going to keep watching. 

 

If the gamekeepers were wearing face coverings then it would show how much shame they have in what they are doing

 

It annoys me that scumbags can walk around my garden and help themselves to whatever they want with complete indifference from the police who now say they won't even attend house burglary unless the burglar won't leave when asked to do so yet respond to this.  I suppose i am just not as worthy as the Duke and Duchess of Rutland,- i'm feeling rather peasant now (that's not a predictive text error) 

There was an article on the stars site about Moscar estates snaring:

https://www.thestar.co.uk/news/stink-pits-filled-with-rotting-carcasses-blamed-for-decline-in-sheffield-s-mountain-hares-1-9178617

 

Although its too late for the petition campaign  i will still sign up to it, makes your feelings shown;

https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/ban-the-use-of-stink-pits-in-england

 

I personally hate snares / stink pit (even more than twitter which also attracts predators and rodents and also snares the wrong target) and feel they should be banned.  Any body coming across one should accidentally  get caught in it unfortunately rendering it ineffective  (if there's no warning sign and its on land you have a legal right to be on i cannot see how you could be charged and even should have grounds for a claim). 

The reply from defra to the petition is interesting reading;

https://www.wildsheffield.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/20180102-Defra-reply-to-LB-Michael-Gove-letter.pdf

 The last part about phoning 999 if witnessing wildlife crime is a bit of a joke, i would expect a reply from desk clerk the same as when the missus reported some youths vandalising a neighbours car - she was told to mind her own business.

 

You do have to accept some animals have to be controlled by man as our ever spreading population has interfered with the natural order already but it has to be done humanely, controlled and controls enforced.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Halibut said:

A very pertinent question, why indeed?

and they are not police. Should the police be hiring masked civilians to interact with suspects?

3 hours ago, Alsone said:

Maybe they were carrying out gamekeeping activites such as pest control at the time (highly likely given they were checking snares), in which case it would be quite normal to mask your face for concealment from your prey, or maybe it's the fact that they face prejudice like this that means they feel the need to hide their identities at work. 

This is typical of what anyone out carrying out pest control might wear: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Real-Tree-Camouflage-Oak-Leaf-Hunting-Balaclava-Veil-Hat-Hood-Snood-Head-Cover/292419297890?epid=8019135079&amp;hash=item44158c6262:g:dMYAAOSwn7JYD53y

Alternatively, if not in camo, they might wear plain black masks. Skin is very easily seen by animals and people from a long distance away. Hence why soldiers use makeup grease to black or camouflage their faces.

 

I think the whole idea that they put masks on just to intimidate innocent bird watchers is quite likely untrue and the kind of rubbish the OP appears to have wanted to stir from his sensational description. I very much get the feeling he doesn't like gamekeepers or the police.

The facts as I read it above, 2 gamekeepers, wearing masks as a part of their employment discovered criminal damage, they did the lawful thing and called the police. The Police found 2 people leaving the area of the damage and stopped them to question them and called the gamekeepers down to see if they could identify them. The birdwatchers weren't the people responsible so were allowed by the police to go on their way. So far as I can see there's nothing to answer here. The gamekeepers did the right thing calling the police. The police did the right thing stopping the people leaving the area and asking a few questions and in calling the gamekeepers down to identify if these were the people they'd seen or not. Would it have been better for the gamekeepers to remove their masks? Probably. But equally given this type of prejudice, it's hardly surprising if they wanted to continue to conceal their identities.
 

The police did not stop the people though - the masked gamekeepers did according to this?

 

https://www.wildsheffield.com/birdwatchers-confronted-by-masked-men/

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, neworderishere said:

really?? why is that such a problem to you? gamekeepers may have a legitimate reason to cover their face in the course of their work? it was just a question stop being so sensitive.

They might, but you'd think they'd have enough sense to uncover them while interacting with members of the public.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, nightrider said:

and they are not police. Should the police be hiring masked civilians to interact with suspects?

The police did not stop the people though - the masked gamekeepers did according to this?

 

https://www.wildsheffield.com/birdwatchers-confronted-by-masked-men/

 

 

If the crime wasn't committed by the couple they probably had no power to prevent them from leaving. That would have been a mistake on the gamekeepers behalf and certainly could lead to a complaint against the gamekeepers. However, to flip this on it's head, in the event that a crime had in fact been committed, then they had ever right to detain them until the police arrived. 

I've already explained above why gamekeepers might be wearing masks. It's certainly not to scare people.



 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Halibut said:

They might, but you'd think they'd have enough sense to uncover them while interacting with members of the public.

Again, yes it might be sensible. But then again on the other hand they might fear retribution. The unfortunate thing is poachers and those on the extreme left who don't like those who take part in or assist in pest / game management, often attack people later if their identities are known. That is enough to make gamekeepers often wish to stay anonymous in interactions with the public.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please dont try to turn this thread into something its not.

Back on topic please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apologies for my "sensational" post. I was just so gobsmacked when I read the article. A response to the Wildlife Trust post asks the key question:

 

" …… why are police helping these criminal gamekeepers? A quick search shows that these wildlife abusers are routinely killing all sorts of protected wildlife on the moors. But saying that, very few of these gamekeepers are ever prosecuted. I wonder why?"

 

And isn't it illegal to obstruct members of the public from leaving a car park on land that doesn't belong to you?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.