UK Norwich Anti-Bloodsports

[Snugglezzz at aol.com]

PRESS RELEASE - FROM

Norwich Anti Bloodsports (NABS) 07713 978685
Saving Animals from Exploitation (SAFE) 07939 458846

Norfolk Wildlife Trust - Slaughtering Deer at Foxley Woods

There is a shoot at Foxley Woods today, and these woods will be occupied by 
our supporters and protestors, (from 5.30.am to late evening) to stop the 
culling of any deer. We will also be at Norfolk Wildlife Trust's offices in 
Thorpe Road Norwich, and in the City (from 12.00 noon) leafletting, and 
informing the general public how the Norfolk Wildlife Trust are spending 
their supporters money, by shooting deer on a weekly basis, at land purchased 
and owned by their financial generosity.

Norfolk Wildlife Trust have started killing Muntjac and Roe deer, and 
although we have already been told by the Norfolk Wildlife Trust Warden (Mr. 
John Milton) that they would NOT be killing roe deer, our supporters witness 
a Roe buck being shot last Thursday (08th May), for which we have 
photographic evidence of.

We also wish the public to know that the Chairman (Mr. John Austin) of the 
Norfolk Wildlife Trust, was the Hunt Master for West Norfolk Foxhounds, and 
he has also owned his own Beagle pack, (for which we have photographic 
evidence of) and he is also one of the people shooting these deer.

We are sure that the majority of Norfolk Wildlife Trust members will be 
outraged to know that deer are being slaughtered on a weekly basis, on land 
paid for and owned by them, and that one of the people actually shooting the 
deer is the Chairman of the Trust, who also supports and participates in 
blood sports.

Until this culling stops, we be patrolling Foxley Woods on a daily basis, and 
carrying out occupations of the woods when necessary to stop the killing of 
these deer. We will also be leafletting their offices, and informing the 
public of this sickening slaughter, as we're sure that once Norfolk Wildlife 
members, supporters, and the general public are made aware of this butchery, 
they may consider leaving as Trust members, and also those who have pledged a 
legacy, or donated money regularly, may also withdraw their financial support.

Page 2 of 3

As we believe that nobody would knowingly wish to give to a Wildlife Trust 
who totally disregard animals by butchering them, when in fact they should be 
protecting them.

The mission of Norfolk Wildlife Trust should be to protect and enhance 
Norfolk's wildlife and wild places. According to their web site, Norfolk 
Wildlife Trust "aims ..... to improve people's understanding and appreciation 
of wildlife." Therefore, slaughtering wildlife goes against the Trust's own 
mission statement.

Notes for Journalists

They have some electric fencing installed, so erect more.
Was told that it would cost another £15,000 for staffing more electric 
fencing - they could easily ask for sponsorship from members to pay for this.
The warden (John Milton) agrees that killing is not a long-term solution.
Excellent financial return on venison the Forestry Commission admit that a 
third of their money for the upkeep of F/C land comes from the sale of 
venison).
Killing should not be an option, especially when this is a Wildlife Trust, as 
they should be guardians, not butchers.
We suggested that they contact the League Against Cruel Sports (LACS) as they 
own 2,500 acres at 37 different sites in the West Country, and they certainly 
do not kill.
Mr. John Milton (Warden) made some excuse about being different land sites - 
but no difference - as the LACS land has a unique collection of natural 
meadows, ancient woodlands and wetlands. Butterflies flourish, birds, hare, 
badgers, and deer. And it also embraces the conservation of habitat for wild 
plants.

All living proof that their policy of sensitive land management WORKS. 

It is a well-known fact that killing will not reduce the population. A
lethal method would require killing deer indefinitely, and killing
increasing number of them to maintain a stable population. It would have a 
serious biological impact as well as a negative impact on deer social 
structure caused by the killing of dominant does. It would increase auto-deer 
collisions during each kill season, a fact supported by insurance statistics. 
It could pose a significant safety threat by the presence of shooters, and 
encourage poaching. 
Page 3 of 3
 
A cull could trigger immigration of deer from surrounding areas. It would 
have an unknown and possible negative impact on the ecosystem. It would be 
extremely brutal and inhumane. Professional shooters do not consistently drop 
deer in their tracks.
There are several immunocontraceptive protocols that have been proven 
effective in reducing deer populations. The Humane Society of the United 
States (HSUS) has demonstrated this in projects at Fire Island, New York, and 
at The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Maryland. A 
gradual and limited reduction in deer numbers through the use of 
immunocontraception would be less drastic, less expensive and humane. It 
would be more biologically sound in addressing the birth rate directly. Deer 
numbers requiring maintenance contraception and associated costs would 
decline over time. It would not disturb the social structure of deer. It 
would have no lasting biological impact because it is reversible. It would 
begin the process of aging the deer population, thus increasing natural 
mortality. It would not pose a safety threat to the community. It would be 
nonviolent and would addresses the cultural sensitivities of the broader 
community.



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.envirolink.org/mailman/private/ar-news/attachments/20030516/76f95e05/attachment.html