By Andrew Jarret

ADVOCATES FOR Animals and the British Divers Marine Life Rescue (BDMLR) yesterday condemned a law that allowed an Angus fisherman to be found not guilty of shooting a seal during the close season.

The animal protection organisations claim this case confirms the Conservation of Seals Act 1970 is ineffective and must be replaced.

On Thursday, Ferryden man George Pullar was acquitted at Arbroath Sheriff Court of shooting dead a common seal in the estuary of the River South Esk near Montrose in July 2005 during the close season.

The trial followed a successful appeal by the Crown following an earlier decision by Sheriff Valerie Johnston last December that the defendant actually had no case to answer.

There has only ever been one successful prosecution under the Conservation of Seals Act 1970 in 36 years, which was on a firearms technicality.

The act does not prohibit killing but sets close seasons and permitted killing methods. Killing of seals during the close season without a licence is a criminal offence, but fishermen are exempted from this provision if they claim a seal was in “the vicinity” of their nets.

Vicinity, however, has no legal definition. Outside the close season seals can be killed at any time, in any place and for any reason.

BDMLR marine mammal medic Elaine Roft, who was a witness in the case explained the fiscal said it was this definition of “vicinity” that gave the Crown difficulty.

The two animal protection organisations said yesterday recent scientific studies by the sea mammals research unit at St Andrews University showed dramatic declines—over 40%—in populations of common seals in some areas of Scotland, including the east coast around the Firth of Tay.

A spokesperson said, “Thousands of seals are thought to be routinely killed every year by members of the fishing, fish farming and salmon angling industries.

“Surprisingly, nobody actually knows how many seals of each species are killed, or where, when or why they are killed, as there is no requirement for records to be kept.”

In March, a group of animal welfare and conservation organisations presented a paper to the Scottish Seals Forum summarising the failings of the existing law, and calling for reform.

The organisations called for new legislation on the basis any killing of seals would be prohibited except in specific, exceptional circumstances of indubitable necessity, when any killing would be licensed, regulated and recorded.

Advocates For Animals’ political director Libby Anderson said, “The Conservation of Seals Act 1970 is a relic of an era when attitudes to the killing of wild mammals were different, and much less was known about the population dynamics and global importance of seals in UK waters.

“The act is seen as providing guidance on the killing of seals, rather than as legislation to promote their conservation.

“I have written today to the environment minister, Michael Russell MSP, asking him to consider this case and bring forward better legal protection for Scotland’s seals.”

Tony Woodley, of British Divers Marine Life Rescue, added, “This appalling verdict, in the face of strong evidence from eye witnesses and much physical evidence, only emphasises the fact that the act needs replacing as soon as possible with legislation which truly protects seals from suffering and indiscriminate culling.”

During the case, Mr Pullar maintained he was simply protecting his livelihood in a manner in which he was entitled and, given the terms of the exemption granted to fishermen by the act, Sheriff Johnston agreed.