Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Christopher (Labour) in the House of Lords on Monday, 23 October 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Animal Welfare Bill.


Animal Welfare Bill

My Lords, I acknowledge that it is important to distinguish between what I will call ““traditional”” shoots and those which have grown up very largely around large cities, particularly London, which appear to be very little more than live shooting practice. In Committee I said that the scale of some of these establishments is such that there is literally no market for what is shot, and the birds are buried in large numbers. There is no evidence, although a photograph has been produced. I wonder whether my noble friend has been able to establish the truth of this. The amendment does not cover my next point, although there is no real reason why it should in the context of what the noble Baroness said. I am not sure whether raising pheasants and partridge in cages is exclusively linked to cost, although cost is clearly a factor, or whether it is linked to the necessity of some of the shoots I am describing to maximise the number of guns, which could produce some results for the man or woman who is shooting. I read a suggestion from the shooting fraternity that, according to acreage and the rest of it, there should be a limit on the number of guns allowed so that the shoot does not simply provide live shooting practice.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
685 c1005-6 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Animal housing Animal welfare Codes of practice Abuse Birds Appeals Cattle Circuses Licensing Inspections Dogs Greyhound racing Domestic animals Game Powers of entry Livestock Pets Registration Standards Sales Sheep Zoos RSPCA Veterinary services State Veterinary Service Prizes Greyhounds Goldfish
Legislation
Animal Welfare Bill 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk