Report from Chris Smith
£160,000 spikes hedgehog rescue
By David Ross, Highland Correspondent in Herald, 3 rd February 2003
A WILDLIFE charity has abandoned plans to save 60 of the Uist hedgehogs, due to be culled this spring, because the trial relocation would cost almost
£2700 per animal.
The decision has provoked a row between the charity and Scottish Natural Heritage, the agency responsible for the cull.
The People's Trust for En-dangered Species (PTES) said Heritage demands had forced costs up to £160,000. The charity said SNH refused to provide
funding to cover the costs created by its insistence that PTES studies the effect the relocated hedgehogs have on wildlife in their new home.
In December, SNH's main board decided to extend the cull of the hedgehogs from North Uist into Benbecula and South Uist at a maximum cost of
£559,425 over the next three years. The aim was to protect the wader birds' population of the Uists. Last year, just 66 of the estimated 90 hedgehogs at
the south end of North Uist were culled. SNH believes there are several hundred hedgehogs on Benbecula, while in South Uist they run into thousands.
The controversial cull will resume in April, but the SNH board had agreed to work with PTES in a trial relocation of the 60 hedgehogs to see whether the
animals could survive the experience.
The charity, which owns nature reserves in England, has an income of about £1m a year. It published an open letter to SNH, announcing that it could no
longer afford to proceed with the relocation project because the costs had quadrupled. The increase was largely because of SNH's insistence on a broader
trial embracing the island hedgehogs and mainland counterparts, it said.
Valerie Keeble, trust chief executive, wrote: "SNH's insistence on studying any possible effects of the translocated hedgehogs on animals resident in
release areas has quadrupled the budget to £160,000. A sum of this size is quite impossible for a charity to find or raise in such a short period of time.
"Given that it was at your insistence that the translocation plans had to be so greatly expanded, we do not think it unreasonable to have expected SNH
to at least contribute towards the cost. SNH's intransigence in refusing to provide some financial backing is particularly disappointing as, in spite of the
difficulties, we had secured at least half the monies required, a considerable achievement in such a short period.
"The remaining sum we needed to be able to implement the revised plan is small in comparison with the large sums allocated for the annual removal of
the hedgehogs from the islands."
She added that if SNH "believes that the additional information to be gained by the proposed study is essential before crucial decisions are made, it could
be argued that SNH has acted precipitately in so fully committing to a cull before making sure they were fully informed on alternative courses of action".
Dr Keeble said that SNH had put "insuperable obstacles" in the PTES's way. She claimed that other research work carried out last year had shown that
at least 1000 hedgehogs would have to be killed every year for at least 15 years if the islands were to be cleared, resulting in a total cull of more than
15,000.
However, George Anderson, SNH spokesman, said: "SNH believes there are significant animal welfare problems associated with moving hedgehogs to
the mainland, both for the Uist animals and mainland hedgehogs. We have, however, always remained open to being proved wrong on this.
"The offer of 60 animals for a trial translocation was made in this spirit. We are disappointed there is to be no trial, but the SNH board was adamant it
would not fund the exercise. We will now be continuing with our plans to cull hedgehogs on North Uist and Benbecula this coming spring."
© The Herald, 3 rd February 2003
 |
 |
 |
| Return to index | Return to Exotic Scottish Animals | Return to Hedgehogs |