Seòmar agus comataidhean

What will we need to consider in expanding that power? What would they be allowed to do?

My question is directed to Libby Anderson and Mike Flynn. We started to talk about Larsen traps and crow cage traps. I would be interested to hear about the animal concerns for trapped birds and decoy birds with multi-catch crow cage traps and Larsen traps. You have talked about it already, but I would like to hear a bit more.

Thank you for that clarity.

In that case there is something confusing in the policy memorandum, which may need to be clarified with the Government bill team. I wonder why the memorandum mentions that

“The use of glue to trap birds is an offence”.

Are glue traps used to trap birds?

Coming back to peat depth, my understanding is that that is an historical measurement that was used by the United Kingdom Government at the time when trying to identify energy sources. The measurement was about something different. We are looking at peat in relation to the damage that can be caused.

We have a peatland restoration initiative in Scotland in which we fund land managers to restore peat, so it seems to me that we are talking about two different things when we start to talk about depth. Peat is a continuous cover and, no matter its depth, we need to protect that in terms of our carbon emissions. What are your thoughts on that?

I want to pursue the question that I raised earlier. The policy memorandum mentions that the bill will bring in a ban on glue traps. It says that the bill

“is being introduced to address raptor persecution and ensure that the management of grouse moors and related activities are undertaken in an environmentally sustainable and welfare conscious manner.”

Paragraph 13 of the policy memorandum states that

“The use of glue to trap birds is an offence”.

Are glue traps used? Is that what we are trying to do here with the glue-trap ban?

Good morning. Thank you for being with us this morning; so much good information has already come from your experience. You are already beginning to touch on what I wanted to get into in the meeting, which is the bigger picture in relation to land management and grouse moors, identifying the fact that we could start to create a credible science base and understand what is really going on. I am interested in hearing what you think is the potential for sustainable grouse moor management contributing to tackling the climate and biodiversity crisis. Could the bill support that?

This question is on Scottish SPCA powers and I will direct it to Libby Anderson. What are the key considerations in coming to a view on whether the Scottish SPCA’s powers should be expanded to investigate wildlife crime?

No, I am content. I have that answer now, but do we have time for me to ask question 12?

I was interested to hear from Jackie Weaver, when she came to our session a few weeks ago, that community councils in England are incorporated and they have revenue-raising powers, which ours do not. That takes me back to the conversation about remuneration. How do we engage more people? What would be the incentive for people to come to a community council?

It seems to me that having some power to do something could attract thoughtful people who want to participate in shaping the place to which they belong and with which they identify. The same remuneration piece applies at the council level. We would attract people who have the right skill sets. We already attract such people, but they take a massive cut and struggle financially. As you said, they tend to do one term and then have to move on. That is a shame, because the tremendous amount of experience that they have gained over the five-year period goes out the door again.