Feral Wild Boar: Gamekeepers’ Response to Defra
December 2005
Introduction
The National Gamekeepers' Organisation (NGO) was pleased to be consulted by Defra officials working on the future of Feral Wild Boar in England. We felt that the reply form supplied would not really allow us space to express our views, so we are responding in writing instead.
For the record, the NGO was founded in 1997 and now has over 9,500 members. It represents the gamekeeping profession in England and Wales. More details about the organisation can be found on our website: http://www.nationalgamekeepers.org.uk/
General Points:
1. Gamekeepers manage about half the land surface of England and are particularly well qualified to comment on the impact and management of feral wild boar because much of a gamekeeper's job involves wildlife management.
2. Aware that this consultation was in the pipeline, we asked our members to express their views on wild boar by voting on the issue at our AGM in March 2005. Our many Gamekeeper Members present were unanimous in their view that all feral wild boar should be eradicated. Not one gamekeeper spoke in favour of any alternative management strategy.
3. We have been urging Government to take action to prevent the spread of feral wild boar for several years.
4. Gamekeepers oppose the spread of wild boar primarily because of the very considerable damage they are already doing to gamebirds, wildlife and physical structures connected with shooting (eg gamebird release pens) in areas of the country where they are already established.
5. The law does not cater for proper management of wild boar. Firearms and wildlife legislation were not designed with wild boar in mind. They are in a legal limbo. If they are not eradicated there will need to be an overhaul of all the relevant wildlife legislation.
6. Despite the potential attractions of wild boar as a sporting resource we know of only one gamekeeper in the country as a whole who regards this possible up-side as offsetting the many dangers associated with allowing wild boar to remain in the UK or to increase.
7. Wild boar are potential carriers of trichinella. The Food Standards Agency has said that all wild boar meat must be tested for trichinella before entering the human food chain. This testing cannot be done by the hunter, thus making wild boar meat the only type of game meat that cannot safely be eaten without veterinary testing. There is no mechanism in place for such testing to address immediate consumption by the hunter or anyone to whom he gives or (locally) sells the meat. The local supply of untested wild boar meat could potentially put people in danger.
The identification of trichinella in wild boar meat could also threaten exports of shot game from this country. This could have devastating consequences for UK game shooting. Trichinella could also spread to farmed pigs from wild boar. Wild boar are a threat to our county's disease status and this is another compelling reason why they should be eradicated.
8. Wild boar are large mammals and have little respect for fencing. They therefore pose a threat to motorists in the same way that deer are responsible for so many road traffic accidents. Safe and humane dispatch of a very angry wounded wild boar at an accident scene is not something to be undertaken lightly and should also be a factor taken into consideration.
Specific Comments On the Consultation Paper
The National Gamekeepers' Organisation makes the following specific comments on the issues mentioned in the Defra consultation document. They appear here in the same order that they are covered in the Defra document and are identified by page and paragraph number.
Page 4, paragraph 5: This paragraph identifies many forms of physical damage that can be caused by wild boar. It makes no mention, however, of damage to gamebird release pens and deer fencing around forestry. Gamekeepers in Kent and other places where wild boar are at large say that such damage can be extensive, costly, and is impossible to stop. They are among the strongest opponents of allowing wild boar to remain in our countryside.
Page 4, paragraph 8: It is true in theory that wild boar numbers would be limited by the availability of resources (shelter, food, etc) but as these are virtually limitless, they will in no way act as a control. Direct control by man is the only way of controlling or reducing numbers.
Page 4, paragraph 10: We agree that current boar culling is ad hoc and lacks a clear legal basis. This is unsatisfactory but it is not a reason for changing the status of feral wild boar. Rather, we need a clearly led, well-organised programme of eradication, with a sound legal basis. Gamekeepers, with their great experience, training and availability of appropriate firearms will be keen to play a crucial role in any such campaign.
Page 5, paragraph 13: We are disappointed that this issue is only being addressed in England at present. Wild boar will not respect national boundaries. What is needed is a UK-wide policy.
Conclusion
The advantages, if any, of having feral wild boar in the UK are totally outweighed by the many disadvantages referred to above. The case that we should have them ‘because they were once native' does not hold water. Wolves and sabre-toothed tigers were once native too and very few people would want them back.
We believe the Government should lead a campaign of eradication of feral wild boar before they spread any further. It is not too late to get rid of them but we believe that doing so will require very urgent action. Gamekeepers will be pleased to assist in such a campaign and are well-qualified and equipped to do so.
With regard to the detail of how it could be done and what legal underpinning such a campaign should have, we would be happy to meet with Defra to discuss in greater detail any of the points we have made here, or to give any general advice we can.