Seòmar agus comataidhean

Thanks very much. That is helpful clarity.

That seems odd to me. We have an act that is about protecting wild mammals, and the bill will replace it entirely—is that the case?

When you had your discussions with NatureScot about granting licences for a maximum of 14 days and its capacity for doing that, did you discuss accountability and transparency?

You have broadly responded to most of my questions. The minister Màiri McAllan stated that

“chasing and killing a mammal with a dog, for sport or otherwise, has no place in modern Scotland”,

and that view is shared by 77 per cent of the Scottish public, who, in response to a 2019 poll, said that the existing legislation to protect animals from hunting needs to be strengthened. It is important to remember that protecting animal welfare is a key concern for people, and it is a key driver of the bill. Why is the title of the bill the Hunting with Dogs (Scotland) Bill when the title of the previous act—the Protection of Wild Mammals (Scotland) Act 2002—better reflects the animal welfare motivation?

That is what I was wondering about.

I would like a bit of clarity on licensing for environmental benefit, which you may have touched on a bit. Section 8 states that a licence in connection with section 7

“must not be granted unless the relevant authority is satisfied ... that killing, capturing or observing the wild mammal will contribute towards a significant or long-term environmental benefit”.

In order to balance the need to protect certain species and enhance biodiversity with the need to protect the welfare of all sentient animals and manage wildlife ethically, will guidance be published on how to determine what meets the criteria for

“significant or long-term environmental benefit”?

I have a supplementary question on the licensing scheme. I am keen to explore the transparency and accountability of the scheme. I would appreciate your views on Alison Johnstone’s proposal in the previous parliamentary session for a member’s bill on the protection and conservation of wild mammals. The proposal was:

“Any use of a licence must be conditional on reporting how many animals have been killed/hunted and that they have been killed in accordance with the licence. This information should be published by the licensing authority.”

On part 1, and still around the definition of “wild mammal”, I am interested in why rats and mice are not included in that definition, given that all animals are sentient.

It is a very good point that not everybody is aware of the possibility or the access that they could have. Work needs to be done on that.

Richard Crawford has indicated that he wants to come in on the same question.

It is quite illuminating that planners do not like common good land being fenced, and that is something to explore.

I am going to pick up the theme of the local food growing strategies. Lou Evans, you have started to share quite a lot of the extensive work that you have been doing in that regard. I am curious to get more of a sense from you of why there are approximately eight local authorities that still have not published their local food growing strategy, despite being required to have done so by April 2020.