Part B. Individual issues

6^{Wild Animals}

Introduction
As far as possible, wild animals should be left in peace so they are able to lead their own lives. During the past century, many species have become extinct and scientific prognoses indicate that this extinction process will accelerate in the decades to come. Yet even when animals are not threatened with extinction, their interests should be taken fully into account. A certain level of nuisance and inconvenience from wild animals should, therefore, be accepted. Unfortunately, in many instances, wild animals are hunted due to a lack of insight into natural processes or purely for pleasure.

Hunting
In the Netherlands, the interaction between humans and wild animals is regulated by the Flora and Fauna Act. The protection of animals is central to this legislation. This means that in principle animals should be left alone. This law stipulates that exemptions for killing are only granted in the event of significant damage to crops or livestock, or when there is an actual threat to public safety or health. Furthermore, this is contingent on there being no other satisfactory solution and that killing the animals will lead to a satisfactory result. However, in practice, exemptions for killing animals are routinely granted by the provinces. This is due to the dominant influence of fauna management groups, which are comprised of landowners and hunters who apply for exemptions to kill animals. Likewise, the composition of the Fauna Trust (Faunafonds), which assesses requests for exemptions, is unbalanced in the favour of landowners and hunters. Consequently, requests for exemption are not critically assessed.

Measures

6.1

With a view to achieving the desired neutrality, the Fauna Trust should be comprised of independent experts. This should result in the more critical assessment of exemption requests. The Flora and Fauna Act should be amended so that the legal protection of animals to which it aspires is translated into the actual protection of animals.

Killing wild animals
The killing of animals should be restricted to the few cases in which the species in question is actually causing significant damage to crops or livestock, or poses a genuine threat to public safety or health. In such cases, permission may be requested - on the basis of article 65 or 68 – to deliberately disturb this species or, when that does lead to a solution and the killing of animals is expected to produce the desired results, then an exemption to kill several animals can be made on the basis of article 68. Permitting the killing of animals for reasons other than the aforementioned is in breach of the basic principles of the Flora and Fauna Act.

Measures

6.2

The Hunting Regulations should specify that the period during which the hunt for pheasants, hare, woodpigeons, rabbits and wild ducks is opened should be restricted to 0 days. Furthermore, shooting should not take place in areas closed to human activities and other areas that are not open to the public.

Driving and killing animals
Killing animals in the whole or part of the country is a very drastic measure for the animals, nature and people. In the event of damage it is, therefore, undesirable on the basis of article 65 to leave whether it is necessary to kill animals up to the individual landowner or occupant.

This also applies to the current interpretation of article 77, on the grounds of which ‘open season’ has been declared on a number of animal species. This means that these species may be killed by anyone who believes that they are experiencing problems as a result of these animals’ behaviour. Article 68 should be used to obtain permission to kill an animal species. This article allows permission to be granted to certain individuals tailored to local circumstances.

Measures

6.3

The animal species that may be deliberately disturbed may be exclusively identified on the grounds of article 65 of the Flora and Fauna Act. The use of article 75 should be restricted to exceptional situations in which there are compelling reasons of great public interest, such as serious threats to public health, which will be determined by an independent institution.

Significant damage
In the Flora and Fauna Act, the concept of ‘significant damage’ is used as a precondition for taking measures against animals. There is no further definition of this notion.

Measures

6.4	The ‘significant damage’ upon which exemption may be granted on the grounds of article 68 of the Flora and Fauna Act should be defined as follows: ten percent of the average yield of crops with € 115 per hectare as a lower limit.

Population control
On the basis of the ‘Animal management and damage control Decree’, a total of 12,000 roe deer are shot annually in the Netherlands in the framework of ‘necessary population management’. This population management is unnecessary. The arguments forwarded to support this population management are limited to significant damage to agricultural crops and road safety.

In practice, however, there is little genuine agricultural damage. Moreover, there are sufficient alternatives to prevent possible damage. This also applies to traffic. There are various measures that can be taken to reduce the chance of possible collisions, such as broad and surveyable verges. Accidents usually occur during nocturnal hours and at high speeds. The provinces should investigate and identify the problem areas and take specific measures, such as closing roads to motorised vehicles (except for residents) wherever possible, reducing the maximum speed or by placing wildlife fences or electronic wildlife crossing warnings along the roads concerned.

Further to this, wild boar and deer are also shot in the framework of population management’. The management of such populations is unnecessary given that they are primarily regulated by the available food supply. In the event of significant damage or a threat to certain generally recognised interests, such as agriculture and public health, then article 68, paragraph subsection a, b, or c offers the possibility of killing or driving these species away. Additional possibilities for shooting are undesirable and should therefore not be offered.

Measures

6.5	In the ‘Animal management and damage control Decree’ the ‘regulation of the population size of animals’ should be removed from article 4.

Foraging areas for geese and wigeon
The Netherlands has an international responsibility as a migratory and over-wintering area for geese and wigeon. These avian species should be afforded sufficient opportunities to forage. Grassland, where damage will be limited by definition, is ideal as tolerated land for this purpose. Possible damage will be diffuse and not be particularly significant in any one place. By not chasing the birds from such land, but instead leaving them to use it in peace, they will not expend unnecessary energy looking for new foraging grounds. This will thus prevent additional foraging and damage.

Measures

6.6

During the winter period (1st November to 1st April), all geese and wigeon should be tolerated on grassland. Eventual damage to the grassland will after appraisal be refunded by the government as long as the landowner or occupier has left the birds completely alone. With regard to plots of land that are susceptible to damage, the eventual damage will also be compensation after appraisal on the condition that the landowner or user has used all relevant deterrents and scaring methods, with the exception of deadly force.

Enforcing the Flora and Fauna Act
There are currently too few investigators available to ensure that independent checks on the proper implementation of the Flora and Fauna Act are made. Given that exemptions are generally granted to land users via the private Fauna management groups, both the provinces and the national government are currently failing to carry out the legally required inspections. A great deal of the supervision is in the hands of game wardens who are in the employ of the hunters themselves. This is an unacceptable situation; all the more given that hunting generally takes place in remote locations or even areas that are closed to the general public. This means that there is virtually no social control and government supervision. The law demands that the provinces adequately and efficiently check the permits that they issue.

Measures

6.7	The national government must appoint additional, independent investigators in the framework of the Fauna and Flora Act, who fall under the responsibility of the Ministry of the Interior.

Urban pigeons
Urban pigeons can be cause a certain degree of nuisance as a result of their excrement, nests and cooing. Councils often respond to complaints about them by taking animal-unfriendly measures such as a sudden feeding ban and the capture and gassing of sometimes thousands of pigeons.
These brutal methods are reprehensible. They are also in contravention of the Animal Health and Welfare Act, which stipulates that nuisance animals must not be killed unless an animal-friendly method has first been tried. Capturing pigeons is completely pointless since pigeons are very fertile (throughout virtually the entire year) and thus quickly reproduce to make up for their losses.

Measures

6.8

The ‘dovecote’ method is an animal-friendly alternative. This entails dovecotes being placed on buildings with flat roofs or in attics, thus giving the pigeons a place to eat, rest and nest. In addition, such pigeonries can be situated in public gardens and green spaces. In this way, 80%-90% of the faeces end up in the dovecotes, which reduces the nuisance problem outside the cotes considerably. By providing a place to nest, most of the eggs laid can be replaced by fake eggs. This is how one can achieve a healthy pigeon population that is not too big. The government should encourage this method.

Other issues relating to wild animals

Measures

6.9	Research should be conducted into how the muskrat population in a specific area develops without pest control and the actual consequences thereof for the dykes.
6.10	Shooting animals during the gestation and lactation periods and moulting season should be prohibited.
6.11	Feral cats should no longer be persecuted, but should be caught, sterilised and re-released at the location where they were captured.
6.12	The collection of lapwings’ eggs should be banned.
6.13	Building in open spaces should be avoided as much as possible. In the event of construction activities and other kinds of encroachment and alteration of the natural environment, measures should be taken for the animals that will lose their biotope as a result.
6.14	The government should once again allow the rehabilitation of sick and injured wild animals by resuming the issuing of permits to shelters and financing to them.
6.15	The government should finance the shelter and care of wild animals that are sick and injured.
6.16	The government should underwrite the costs associated with saving the victims of oil spills in the event of oil disasters along North Sea coast.
6.17	There should be a protection programme, which aims to restore the habitat of species that are threatened with extinction, such as the European hamster and stag beetle.
6.18	The reintroduction on species that have become extinct in our country, such as the white-tailed eagle, wolf, lynx, otters, black grouse, etc., should be highly restricted, that is assuming that it is the biotope that determines their presence. Reintroduction should only be considered when the natural return of these species has been rendered impossible due to unnatural barriers, when the original cause of the extinction has been completely removed and when the biotope can provide sufficient space, rest and food.
6.19	There should be severer penalties and greater surveillance to tackle and prevent the persecution of predatory species, particularly birds of prey.

6Wild Animals

6^{Wild Animals}