Cull Archives - Page 9 of 11

“You’re Shooting Yourself In The Foot” – Cults CC Tells Malone

Aberdeen City, Articles, Breaking, Featured, Opinion No Responses »

May 272011

Voice’s Suzanne Kelly reports from a dramatic meeting ( 26.05.11 ) of Cults, Bieldside & Milltimber Community Council she was kindly invited to attend as a guest, and took the opportunity to discuss the roe deer cull in person with Cllr. Aileen Malone, Convener of the Housing and Environment Committee responsible for the decision.

Protestors Deliver A Petition Of Nearly 2,500 Signatures To Cllr Aileen Malone

Lib Dem Councillor Aileen Malone avoided debating with me the Tullos Hill Roe Deer cull she supports on Northsound 2 a fortnight ago.

She ‘had a prior engagement’ and could not spare 20 minutes over the phone on a Sunday morning to give Aberdeen her reasons for wanting the deer shot.

Cllr. Malone successfully silenced me and the Nigg Community Council representative when we wanted to debate the cull issue at the 10 May Housing & Environment Committee meeting. We weren’t allowed to speak to the Committee because there was no written report on the cull – just a verbal report. It didn’t matter to the Committee (except for four members) that new information had come to light, and the Community Councils wanted to be heard.

After the Housing Committee voted to get on with killing the deer to plant ‘a tree for every citizen,’ Malone told the media she hoped that would be an end to the controversy. With thousands of petitioners, four protesting community councils, and various animal charities against the cull, this was wishful thinking taken to a new level.
See: Tullos Hill Picnic

I was not alone in making complaints about the handling of the deer cull and tree planting issues to Aberdeen City Council. It is hoped that any cull will be halted until a proper investigation and a democratic, fully informed debate can be held. The 10 point report I prepared as a basis for my complaint is attached at the end of this article. ( click here )

It had been circulated to the members of the Housing Committee and to Cults, Bieldside & Milltimber Community Council, where Ms Malone is an elected City Councillor. I told them I would like to attend their next meeting as a guest on this issue, and they kindly invited me along.

Having served as a Community Council member myself, I was not surprised to hear they have some of the same issues I remembered from my days on Torry’s Council – litter, tree pruning, and so on.

I was surprised to find Mike Shepherd, Chair of the Friends of Union Terrace Gardens at this meeting. He gave a presentation on the state of play of the design competition, and what funding might be used for any scheme. To his surprise and mine, Councillor Aileen Malone made a promise that was both dramatic and new to Mike and me.

Cllr. Malone categorically stated and repeated this promise: after a final design for the gardens is chosen, the people will have a vote on whether to go with the design – or to leave Union Terrace Gardens undeveloped (which could include some improvements and amenities)

She was not sure whether or not this would be only for the people of Aberdeen – perhaps the Shire would be voting as well: but she was adamant this was the case. So Friends of Union Terrace Gardens – do not despair just yet. She also confirmed twice that “not a penny” of City Council money would be used to develop the gardens. No doubt Mike Shepherd will have more to say on these matters.

Back to the deer...

The Cults, Bieldside & Milltimber Community Council Chairman, Peter Reiss opened the deer debate by saying he attended a recent Civic Forum meeting – and was struck that on the subject of the deer cull, there was virtual agreement across the ages and across the boards against the cull. “For outsiders looking in, this looks like a no-brainer: let’s put the trees elsewhere” he said.

Ms Malone tried to use arguments which had already been dismissed in the press – not least in the Aberdeen Voice. She said that expert advice had been given. I countered, and explained to the Councillors that someone had briefed the SNH against the non-lethal measures (as shown in a letter of 25 November from SNH to the council), and offers from experts – who had knowledge and experience of ways to plant trees without killing deer – was refused.

I told the Council that the SNH letter proves someone had said tree guards were out because ‘they had visual impact.’ This did not sit well with the Cults Council at all. I explained that the phase 2 consultation documents made no mention of any deer cull – again, the councillors sided with me.

By now an increasingly desperate Ms Malone explained that the tree planting was ‘A Liberal Democrat manifesto promise’ – as if that were justification of some sort.

Other council attendees had comments for her position such as:

“Aren’t you shooting yourself in the foot,”

“other forms of deer control should be paramount”,

“think about the reaction you have had here tonight – it looks like a stupid thing to do: you have not won the argument.”

Amazingly Ms Malone tried two further tactics. One was to make general sweeping comments that deer culls are necessary, and her earlier, discredited ploy that only a handful of people initially objected to her in writing, and most were animal activists.

I reminded her that the full story had not come out immediately – the phase 2 consultation made no mention of the cull for Tullos Hill, and it had been subsequently proved that I was one of those who had written to her with my address opposing the cull. She had gone to the Press and Journal at first, saying ‘only about one’ person from Aberdeen had objected to the cull. She later made private apologies – but none through the Press & Journal, leaving readers of it with the wrong impression.

Animal lovers and activists might be interested in two further statements Councillor Malone made at the meeting.

Firstly, there has been permission in place to kill the Tullos Hill Roe Deer since March. The Council still are not answering questions about when the shooters will be sent in – I have asked – and if anyone else cares to ask the Council, it may help.

Secondly, Malone alludes to plans to kill the deer at Bridge of Don.

Some Councillors were all in favour of culls of animals – where the animals are in danger of starvation or over population. They were reminded that 30 deer live on Tullos Hill. Malone seemed to say that 9 to 12 of these would be shot now, and the shooting would go on.

She had no real answer why the £225,000 for ten years of fencing / protection was demanded up front. One person present said:

“no one in their right mind would put their hands in their pockets” for protection in the circumstances – i.e. not knowing exactly what they were paying for or for how long.

I reminded those present that there were plenty of ways to have deer and trees together. One councillor suggested having less trees planted. I reminded everyone of the Scottish SPCA position on the matter – the Tullos Hill deer would be killed not because it was for their safety/health – but to plant trees . “Abhorrent and absurd” were how the Scottish SPCA put it.

At the end of the day the Council decided to draft a letter to the City. The debate was closed with Peter Reiss saying to Ms Malone “you have not taken the public with you, and people are saying “this is ridiculous”. It was suggested this might even damage Ms Malone’s political career.

And that is where we leave it for now.

But one thing is certain, the opposition to the cull has not gone away by a very long shot. If nothing else, the Cults, Bieldside & Milltimber Community Council gave me the democratic forum for debate that I could find nowhere else: I am extremely grateful to them.

Suzanne Kelly’s 10 point report – Click here. – Please consider writing to Aberdeen City Council’s Housing and Environment Committee in support of this formal complaint.

Deer Today, Gone Tomorrow? – The Battle of Tullos Hill Begins

Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Environment, Featured, Information, Opinion No Responses »

May 112011

By Suzanne Kelly.

· Housing & Environment Committee refuse to hear Kelly and representative from Nigg Community Council

· Deer Cull to go ahead

Two Thousand And Four Hundred area residents signed a petition asking for the Tullos Hill Roe Deer cull to be scrapped. Two Thousand people from around the world likewise signed petitions.
Torry Community Council were kept in the dark about a cull; Nigg Community Council wished to speak on the subject today. The initial consultation for the public to comment on said nothing about a cull.

In the 21st century in an allegedly democratic society, the above facts should have ensured that the proposed deer cull – designed to allow 40,000 trees to be planted – would have been debated and properly examined. You might even think that local people would have had a say in the destruction of a generations-old population of perfectly harmless deer.

You might even have thought that those pushing for a cull would stop for a moment and wonder if they were possibly making a mistake. And if you were really really an optimist, you might think that these same people bent on the destruction of the deer would have allowed people to talk about it – maybe even let Councillors have a vote on the matter.

You would be wrong.

I first got involved after Jeanette Wiseman wrote an article for the Aberdeen Voice. In writing my follow-up, I was struck by how secretive the deer cull had been kept by those in power, seemingly favouring trees over deer (see ‘Shhh! – Don’t Mention the Pre-planned Deer Cull, Aberdeen Voice). I was happy to help the animal organisations such as Animal Concern and Aberdeen Animal Action with further publicity and research. I did my best as a spokesperson.

This Monday a small delegation presented Aileen Malone with a paper petition signed by 2,400 people – mostly people who live within Aberdeen. Lush – who have been outstanding in their support and energy towards stopping the cull – came along, as did Jeanette, and Fred Wilkinson of the Voice. We met the Press, presented the signatures, and hoped this would have some impact on Malone.

Yesterday, Tuesday 10th May I might have had a chance to address the Housing & Environment Committee. Not only had Malone sent me an email saying they would vote on the cull, but the extraordinary lack of consultation with Torry Community Council had – or rather should have – been grounds for speaking.

Anne Begg is on record as saying ‘I see this (demand for money) as an appalling attempt to fudge their responsibility.’

If as has been shown, the Community and the people had been kept in the dark about the cull – then how could the Committee continue as if nothing wrong had been done? Surely all of the elected members would want to know how extremely badly the pro-cull Councillors and City officials had acted.

If the Nigg Community Council (which probably should have been consulted, too) had seen fit to send a delegate to this Committee meeting, surely the Councillors would want to know what the people of Nigg wanted to say? Certainly not.

First, Malone addressed the Nigg Delegate as being from ‘Nigg Community Centre’. “Nigg Community Council” several people shouted. She corrected herself. Tut, tut: Nigg had MISSED THE DEADLINE TO ASK TO SPEAK. Malone made a move to have his deputation request rejected. Someone else suggested that my request and the Nigg request should be jointly put to a vote.

( See Suzanne Kelly’s intended Speech – https://aberdeenvoice.com/2011/05/a-plea-for-the-deer-a-speech-unspoken/ )

It was on an incredible technicality that Aileen Malone suggested we should not be allowed to speak. No physical, paper report had been attached to todays Housing & Environment Committee Meeting’s papers. The previous meeting’s minutes reported that ‘a report would be made’ concerning the deer cull.

Some of the Councillors – Neil Cooney and Yvonne Allan – said that a report should have been attached, and that the deputations should be allowed. Malone decreed that the report was always going to have been a verbal one, and our requests for deputations were not valid.

A vote was held which went against us speaking. I wrote down the names of those who were trying to save the deer by allowing the speeches, and can report that they included; Neil Cooney, Jim Hunter, Norman Collie, Yvonne Allan, Muriel Jaffrey, and Jackie Dunbar. The Convener Aileen Malone, Vice Convener, and Councillors Yuill, Noble, Cormie and Robertson were among those who voted to kill our deer.

They had seemingly deliberately made a mockery of the public’s not stumping up the ransom money – they had one Mr Reilly, ( derisively I thought) announce that a total of 2 donors pledged a total of £51.00 for fencing. As every Councillor knew – the animal groups were not going to submit to the demand for £225,000 for deer protection.

I hope every anti-cull person out there will contact all of their elected representatives and the Housing & Environment Committee

The word blackmail was used by many individuals and groups to sum up how they felt about the Council’s demand for the money. Anne Begg is on record as saying ‘I see this (demand for money) as an appalling attempt to fudge their responsibility.’

I waited a few minutes before I left.

Even though I was not surprised by the decision, the concept that the absence of a written report was sufficient to derail any debate was a bit of a shock.

When I did leave, I was quickly followed by virtually all of the Media present – BBC, STV, P&J, Northsound, Evening Express.

I gave a fairly lengthy, comprehensive account of past and present developments and issues. And then I raced home to brief the legal team ( yes, legal avenues to save our deer are being actively pursued ) – and to thrash out this swift article. I will also publish my rough draft speech notes. Who knows? Someone on the Committee might actually want to read these.

I have to say that some of the Councillors – Cooney and Allan in particular – did all they could today. The rest seem to have either been sleepwalking – or voting the LibDem line. I hope they realise this is a beginning and not an end to the story.

What now?

If the feelings of the thousands of people and dozens of animal organisations can be swept away, our willingness to take action cannot be so easily stopped. Many groups are planning to ‘take to the hills’ to stop the slaughter. I hope every anti-cull person out there will contact all of their elected representatives and the Housing & Environment Committee (feel free to copy to me) to demand a full enquiry into the tree initiative be held before the £2,500 (yes that’s a correct figure) is spent on the first round of deer slaughter.

You can certainly send in some Freedom of Information Requests to Aberdeen City Council; the email address is: foienquiries@aberdeencity.gov.uk

why not ask the Council:

– who wrote the phase 2 consultation?

– who decided to leave the deer cull out of the consultation?

– does the city already owe £44K or so for previous failed tree planting?

– who decided not to tell Torry Community Council about the cull?

– who decided to tell SNH that the non-lethal options would not work – and that ‘tree guards have visual impact?’

And tell them we demand warning in advance of any cull.

Aberdeen Voice will do its best to publish updates relevant to this story. Personally, nothing would make me happier than having the opportunity to write that this whole sorry cull has been stopped.

A Plea For The Deer – A Speech Unspoken

Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Environment, Events, Featured, Information, Opinion No Responses »

May 112011

Suzanne Kelly presents her speech which she was prevented from delivering at the crucial Housing and Environment Committee meeting yesterday due to an ‘incredible technicality’.

The committee voted down the opportunity to consider input from Ms. Kelly and a representative of Nigg Community Council, thereby ruling out further debate ahead of pressing ahead with the cull, in spite of the receipt of a 2400 strong petition, and 82 letters in opposition to the cull on Monday.

Councillors, thank you for allowing me to address your Committee today.

I am here to echo the sentiments of thousands of Aberdonians as well as national and international people, and ask you to stop any plan for a cull of deer on Tullos Hill.

I would like to propose you adopt one of two positions:

Halt the cull, and then plant trees once non-lethal measures can be put in place or …

re-launch the extremely flawed phase 2 consultation to the public – this time telling them that the tree planting will involve a deer cull.

There are some of you who insist that:

‘deer must be culled’,
‘we have taken advice from Scottish Natural Heritage’,
‘animal lovers should pay £225,000 for deer protectors’.

Let us examine those positions in a moment.

Firstly, let us consider how extraordinarily un-democratically – how against established good governmental practice the entire issue has been handled.

Irrespective of a Councillor’s personal views on animal culling, I hope we are all in agreement that there are established procedures for consulting with the public and consulting with Community Councils which have been wholly ignored. If you are upholding the law and the rights of your electorate, you must now stop this cull – at least until a proper consultation is launched.

The phase 2 public consultation for ‘a tree for every citizen’ closed at the end of January.

I read this document on the Council’s website; so did countless other people. The document tells me that there are rabbits in the area, and have been considered.

Who drafted this consultation and why did they omit the cull which was already being planned? We know the cull was being planned by the date of the letter from Scottish Natural Heritage, which I will come to presently. Who exactly decided to keep this cull from the public? Was it just an accidental oversight? Why were rabbits mentioned but not deer – the effect this had on me personally was to make me reach the conclusion that animals had been taken into consideration when the scheme was planned.

someone at the council or in the ranger service has decided to bypass normal democratic procedure

I can assure you that had a cull been mentioned, I would have most definitely objected to the plan while the consultation was open. And so would many other citizens of Aberdeen. I feel as if we have been robbed of our right to be properly consulted. In view of this point alone, the cull should not go ahead.

Another gross breach of protocol and established practice was the complete disregard shown to Torry Community Council. The City should by now have received a letter from Torry Community Council; as reported in the Evening Express, the Council voted unanimously at its April meeting to condemn this cull, and to complain that it was not consulted.

The Torry Community Council also confirmed that at no point was it alerted that a cull was part of the tree-planting scheme. Who, I would like to know, will take responsibility for this breach of established procedure? The City Council is already widely criticised for its failure to consult the Nigg Community Council concerning development plans for Loirston Loch. It is incumbent on this Housing Committee to stop any cull plans until it has addressed this procedural failure.

But now we come to the letter from Scottish Natural Heritage to ranger _________________. I contacted the ranger to whom the letter is addressed, and he referred me to Ian Tallboys, head ranger, for clarification.

Reading this letter – someone at the council or in the ranger service has decided to bypass normal democratic procedure.

Someone has told the SNH that fencing is a bad idea. Someone has even more incredibly told the SNH that tree protectors should not be used on Tullos Hill as they have ‘visual impact.’ ‘Visual Impact.’ On a coastal hill. Tree protectors are in use far and wide throughout this city in areas that have a great deal more traffic than Tullos Hill.

How can anyone for that matter decide for this Committee, for Torry Community Council, and for the citizens who should have properly been consulted that a subjective observation as to ‘visual impact’ condemn a small herd of deer to death?
Obviously this Committee will now realise that the SNH were led, by a person or persons yet to come forward, to decide that the lethal option was the only solution.
There are many, many non-lethal solutions to this issue of deer eating trees – this Committee acknowledges that the deer do not have to die.

Otherwise it would not have issued its highly controversial demand for money. The demand for money for fencing and tree protectors itself is a declaration that these are suitable options for deer control. It is of course a demand that is seen as nothing short of blackmail by myself, by animal charities, and the electorate.

This is one reason the avenue was not pursued: the City should be responsible for finding money, not citizens. The City has resources at its disposal – I note your new Robert the Bruce statue in front of the £60 million pound Marischal building, soon to be fitted with brand new furniture.

Are we really to understand that this city, with its vast real estate portfolio – which sells land at less than market value to property developers has no means of finding £225,000?

This city which hopes to borrow nearly £100 million pounds to fill in Union Terrace Gardens?

The suggestion the city has no money and cannot raise money is unacceptable. This Committee were offered the free services of a deer management expert: this was turned down. Some of the non-lethal methods which would work include: tree guards, fencing, using one of some 3 dozen types of trees which deer do not eat, planting crops nearby which deer will eat, planting the trees elsewhere, planting once the money can be found for these measures, using chemical deterrents on the young trees.

The Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals calls your proposed cull ‘abhorrent and absurd’ – a sentiment echoed by thousands of people. The cull is not a suitable response: other deer will move into the area, as per the various animal charities I have consulted – many of which have made this plain to the Committee already.

We seem to be talking about a herd size of 30 animals. This is not over population.

As an aside, it would be nice to see the Council put up roadside ‘deer crossing’ signs in the area to warn motorists deer do live in Aberdeen.

I just mentioned the herd size. This was one of a half dozen relevant questions I asked as long ago as 28 February, Most of my questions were not answered at all. Some were answered only recently, and some were answered with the phrase that has become a mantra for pro cull councillors: we have taken advice – a cull is the only answer.

Well, you have not taken advice. You briefed SNH as to why you did not want the non-lethal options, and then presented their response to this briefing as being their unbiased professional opinion. The animal charities all give you non-lethal options, and some of you inexplicably reject them.

Back to these questions of mine.

some person or persons initially said that the tree planting scheme would be completely cost neutral

I asked a number of questions which would have provided material for me to start hunting for an appropriate grant for saving the Tullos Hill Roe Deer. The timescale was very tight indeed – but the lack of forthcoming answers made it completely impossible for me to try and find any kind of grant or fund.

Again, everything is being slanted towards a wholly unnecessary cull. The silence of the persons responsible for the ‘tree for every citizen’ scheme has blocked this avenue.

As an aside, in some of the documentation I read phrases such as ‘in a few years the trees will begin to pay for themselves.’ Is this tree scheme meant to be a source of income for the City? Am I wrong and no such plan to make money from the Tullos Hill plan exists? Where is there any consultation on this matter?

I will be pleased to hear that no plans for commercial wood exploitation exist, and will report back to the media and Torry Community Council. It is serious enough that the consultation was slanted, that the SNH were briefed to favour a cull, and that Torry Community was excluded from what should have been a simple scheme. But to have some form of commercial enterprise in mind that would forever change Torry certainly cannot be going on behind the scenes, and thank you for confirming this is not the case in advance.

To sum up the history of this whole irregular affair, some person or persons initially said that the tree planting scheme would be completely cost neutral. Anyone with a rudimentary grasp of finance would have realised that planting over 200 thousand trees would indeed be expensive.

It would also seem that the responsible person or persons will not be putting up their hand and admitting their mistake – and instead are pulling out all the stops so that £2,500 is spent on the cull rather than the more expensive, humane, ethical non-lethal options which most definitely exist.

Someone or other briefed SNH that the non-lethal options would mysteriously not work on Tullos Hill.

Someone or other created a public consultation that was by omission of the cull misleading.

Someone or other decided to ignore protocol and kept Torry Community Council’s elected members in the dark.

This same person or persons came up with a scheme to ask the public to come up with a quarter of a million pounds before today.

Someone or other sadly forgot to tell the corporate sponsors that a cull was involved.

Someone or other has a good deal to answer for.

What a pity that person or persons did not think to seek funding for fencing themselves as soon as it became apparent there were cost implications they had not previously recognised.

Ladies and gentlemen, whatever your personal feelings are on deer – although Mr Fletcher has made it plain that they are no different to rats or pigeons – you must acknowledge that in these circumstances you must vote against any cull.

If a vote goes ahead in favour of a cull, please rest assured that every aspect of the tree scheme and any cull will be put under a microscope not just by me, but by established animal welfare organisations and legal minds.

The mechanisms for such actions are, I can promise this Committee, most definitely being readied. The deer are not overpopulated; other deer will move in, and you will have someone killing these animals for some 5 years.

Perhaps you think the animal instantly drops down dead when shot? This is hardly the usual case. In many instances, the terrified, shocked animal will try to wander around in agony as it begins to internally drown in its own blood.

Trackers will be needed to follow the blood stains from the wound or from its breathing out of blood droplets (sometimes very hard to find) and finish the creature off. There are various types of hits an animal will sustain, this is not by any means the worst case scenario – some animals if not quickly found die an agonising, slow death that takes days.

On behalf of myself, the thousands of Aberdonians who signed the petitions, do not plant a tree for us if you are having a cull to do so.

Thousands Sign To Save Tullos Deer – Decision Looms

Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Environment, Events, Featured, Information, News No Responses »

May 062011

With Thanks To Alan Robertson.

Aberdeen City Council are going to receive a petition signed by over 2,200 Aberdonians calling for the Council to abandon plans to kill 30 deer on Tullos Hill on the outskirts of the city. The wild roe deer are to be killed as part of a council project to create a new woodland and wildlife habitat. Local and national campaigners have condemned the planned cull as cruel, wasteful and unnecessary.

A small delegation of campaigners will deliver the petition to the council at The Town House, Broad Street at 3.30pm on Monday.

Aberdeen City Council Housing and Environment Committee gave pro deer campaigners until May 10th to come up with £225,000 to pay for tree protectors and deer fencing. As campaigners have not attempted to raise this “blood money” it is expected that the Council Housing and Environment Committee will, at their meeting on May 10th, confirm that the deer cull will go ahead.

Campaigner Jeanette Wiseman states:

“We hope that the Housing and Environment Committee will listen to the thousands of Aberdeen voters who have asked them to stop this needless slaughter. There is still time for an eleventh hour reprieve for the deer on Tullos Hill. Aberdeen City Council can stop this shameful act.”

The public consultation that was launched by Aberdeen City Council on 29th October 2010 ( closed on 28th January 2011) made no mention of the proposed deer cull at Tullos Hill, despite the fact that a delegation from Scottish National Heritage had visited Tullos Hill on 15th November to assess the option of a deer cull at the request of the Council, and wrote to the Council on 25th November.

The letter from SNH makes it clear that, while the public consultation was still active, someone at the City had briefed SNH to steer the decision making towards a deer cull, despite the fact that there are other options. The briefing by the Council to SNH was therefore biased, the consultation was flawed and the handling of both these matters by the Council requires investigation.

See: http://www.aberdeencity.gov.uk/Consultations/ArchiveConsultations/cst_tree_every_citizen.asp

The Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals is completely against the proposed cull, as are other animal welfare organisations, thousands of Aberdonians, and many concerned people living further away. Scottish SPCA Chief Superintendent Mike Flynn said:

“We firmly believe culls should only take place to protect the public or for animal welfare reasons”. He went on to say that: “It is absurd and abhorrent to undertake a cull because it would be too costly to protect trees which have not even been planted. We would suggest these trees should either be planted elsewhere or not at all. Trees should certainly not be planted at the expense of the lives of animals.”

Lush Aberdeen and Lush Edinburgh are actively involved in trying to save the roe deer ; the Edinburgh Lush team cycled to the Aberdeen store to raise awareness and funds. and Lush were actively involved in circulating petitions against the proposed cull.

A Facebook site to Save the Tullos Hill Roe Deer has been highlighting the main issues and over 2100 people have signed up to the site.

The fact is, that the Council are not using the normal city-wide procedure for tree planting at Tullos Hill and that is the reason the deer are to be culled. Elsewhere in the City, tree protectors are being used – even in areas where there are no roe deer, and will require maintenance that will cost money; these facts are being kept from the public to make it appear that Tullos Hill is too costly, when in fact it needs to be considered in the bigger context – as part of the Tree for Every Citizen initiative.

The precedent of how tree planting has been handled at Kincorth Hill and other areas of the City, where no deer were culled shows this to be be true.

Aberdeen City Council Housing and Environment Committee at their meeting on 1 March 2011 resolved:

”to extend an invitation to the individuals and organisations who have objected to these deer control measures to raise the sums necessary to provide and maintain alternative measures, including fencing and rehousing of deer, by no later than 10th May, 2011.”

With only days before the decision is taken, anyone who feels strongly about the proposed cull should contact members of the Housing and Environment Committee to forward their concerns.

Torry Says No To Cull

Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Environment, Featured, Information, Opinion No Responses »

Apr 292011

With thanks to Torry Community Council.

Torry Community Council unanimously blasted City council’s planned deer cull and blackmailing tactics.

At its meeting on 21 April, Torry Community Council condemned the planned Tullos Hill Roe Deer Cull. Suzanne Kelly asked for and was given a chance to speak for the deer at the meeting, attended by 14 of the Community Councillors.

They all voted unanimously to send a letter to the City before the 10 May deadline (the date imposed by the City for animal lovers to raise £225K or the deer will be culled) immediately condemning the Cull.

There was anger that yet again the consultation process had bypassed the Torry Community and its Council.

Tree protectors were discussed, and as they are so widely used elsewhere in the City, people could not believe that someone, somewhere in the City organisation had briefed SNH that they were unsuitable as they had ‘visual impact,’

The vandalism which marred previous tree planting was also discussed. Two members of the Council said the City’s demand for £225,000 was ‘blackmail.’

Kelly claimed this as a victory against the senseless cull, and indicated that locals had signed a petition, and would soon be handing in another 1100 signatures of people wanting the deer saved.

Open Letter To Cllr. Aileen Malone

Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Featured, Information, Opinion No Responses »

Apr 222011

Voice’s Suzanne Kelly has over the past 10 weeks campaigned tirelessly in her efforts to oppose Aberdeen City Council’s proposed cull of roe deer on Tullos Hill, writing letters and liasing with groups and individuals on both sides of the debate. Suzanne wishes to share with Aberdeen Voice readers her latest letter to Cllr. Aileen Malone and the Housing and Environment Committee in the hope that others might be encouraged to add their own voice to this controversial issue.

20 April 2011
Councillor Aileen Malone
Convener, Housing Committee
Aberdeen City Council

Dear Ms Malone

Re: Tullos Hill Roe Deer

I am writing this open letter to you in your role as Convener of the Housing & Environment Committee and leading proponent of the ‘A Tree for Every Citizen’ Scheme.

I am sending this letter to you in this format for two reasons. Firstly, you ‘accidentally’ deleted an email I sent you (with my street address) in which I protested against the Tullos Hill Roe Deer Cull, which is being planned as a result of the tree scheme, and I would hate for you to similarly lose this letter.

Secondly, I want to enlist the help of as many Aberdeen citizens and others opposed to this senseless cull as possible: if anyone reading this letter agrees with it, kindly add your name and address, and send it to Ms Malone.

Your committee came up with the ultimatum to citizens: give us £225,000 before 10 May – or we will kill the deer. ‘Blackmail’ is the word that springs to mind. I would never have believed a City would consider blackmailing its citizens. To do so after what seems like deliberately concealing the planned cull from the ‘Phase 2’ consultation which closed in January is inexcusable.

It has been demonstrated that before this consultation was launched, someone involved in the ‘Tree’ scheme had been briefing Scottish Natural Heritage and deliberately steering them away from the many humane alternatives to a cull that exist. I thought it was very clever to leave out the deer from the consultation but to mention rabbits – it certainly fooled me (and no doubt many others) into thinking that all animals had been duly considered, and that only rabbits were worth mentioning. Some might call that sneaky.

If the public consultation ending in January mentioned a deer cull or the need to raise money for tree protection, there are hundreds of people who would have objected. The opportunity was lost to them because the consultation was so very flawed.

The Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals is completely against the cull, as are many other animal welfare organisations, and thousands of Aberdonians as well as concerned people living further away.

I recall how you went to the Press & Journal and said something to the effect that ‘only about one’ local resident had contacted you protesting the cull.

You later made private apologies to me and others who indeed had contacted you – you ‘accidentally’ deleted my email. (I waited and must have missed it, but I never did see an apology in the Press & Journal for your error. It is almost as if you did not want to set the record straight).

There are dozens of ways in which the deer can be saved (tree guards – which someone told the SNH ‘had visual impact’ are being used elsewhere in the city such as Forrit Brae; dozens of types of trees are deer resistant, fencing could be used, trees could be planted elsewhere…). I can only hope that someone with sense within the C ouncil is striving to find a solution other than this cull.

But here, Ms Malone, is my counter-offer to your ‘blackmail’ demand for £225,000.

Call off the cull and plant the trees after suitable alternatives have been found to protect the deer, and make a public announcement to that effect by 3 May 2011, or:-

I will lodge a formal complaint against you with the Standards Commission for Scotland with a view to its censuring you (I do have rather an impressive list of complaints on your handling of this issue it must be said)
I will start a campaign calling for both internal and external auditing and inquiries into the entire ‘Tree for Every Citizen’ campaign focussing on who briefed SNH towards a cull and how the public was treated
I will start a campaign calling for your immediate resignation from the Council
I will call on your political party to censure you
I will call on as many people in and outside of Aberdeen to join me in these aims as possible

I expect your reply by 3 May, after which date if there is no halt to the cull, I will begin to take these actions against you and seek legal advice as well on preventing the cull.

Maybe my one letter won’t carry much weight with you; maybe no one will join me. But even if no one else signs this letter and sends it to you, I will continue to fight you on this very sad state of affairs until I have prevailed.

As a reminder, here are the questions I asked you and others by email on 8 March of this year (my comments in red)

When was the cull first planned? – NO ANSWER GIVEN
Can the proposed trees not go elsewhere? – NO ANSWER GIVEN
What will be the cost of the cull? – NO ANSWER GIVEN
What is the cost of the alternatives? – NO ANSWER GIVEN
Are we proposing to create a habitat for squirrels and deer as your email suggests – by first culling deer? – (APPARENTLY YES)
What is the cost of fire damage to the ‘Gramps’? – NO ANSWER GIVEN
When exactly were the voters of Aberdeen asked if they would prefer to have saplings than deer? – (NEVER HAPPENED)
Was a deer struck and killed by a vehicle during the recent ‘capping’ exercise? – NO ANSWER GIVEN
You refer to the area as ‘Urban’ – patently it is not an urban area at all – but is an area in danger of being destroyed by urban sprawl -comment please. – NO ANSWER GIVEN
How many deer precisely are on Tullos Hill? – NO ONE ANSWER GIVEN – RANGES FROM ‘A FEW’ TO ‘ABOUT 30’ HAVE BEEN SENT OR SEEN IN THE PRESS
Are all of the rangers and environmental experts convinced culling is the only way forward? – NO ANSWER GIVEN
Which department/arm of the council is charged with preventing further urban sprawl? – NO ANSWER GIVEN
What other deer populations are there in the coastal Aberdeenshire area? – NO ANSWER GIVEN
Have the local community councils been consulted, and if so, do they agree with the cull? – NO ANSWER GIVEN

Scottish Natural Heritage in its 26 November letter suggests that the public might not be in favour of a cull and need careful handling. They offer to help you with a robust communication plan. So, Ms Malone: how is that working out for you?

Yours,
Suzanne Kelly

Also signed by ________________________________________________________________________

Name and Address

(if anyone wishes to sign and send Ms Malone this letter as well, please keep me informed and send a copy if possible to sgvk27@aol.com. Thank you)

* Aberdeen voice is grateful to Ian Britton and Mark Aert for photographs.

Our Deer Friends – Lush Edinburgh Cycle Into Aberdeen

Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Featured, Information, Opinion No Responses »

Apr 222011

Voice’s Suzanne Kelly joined those gathered outside Lush cosmetics in Union Street in Aberdeen to welcome the 5 campaigners from Lush in Edinburgh who had cycled all the way from our capital city, collecting support, and highlighting opposition to Aberdeen City council’s proposed, unnecessary cull of roe deer on Tullos Hill.

12:30pm on Wednesday 20 April – an intrepid group of 5 Lush Edinburgh staff cycle the last few minutes of an epic trek from the Lush Edinburgh shop to Lush Aberdeen.

They are all kitted out in T-shirts with a photo of a deer, with the slogan ‘Too Deer A Price To Pay.’ They are here in answer to Aberdeen City’s Council’s threatened – economically motivated – deer cull.

The Committee told Aberdeen citizens and animal lovers: Give us £225,000 by 10th May for fencing and tree protectors – OR WE WILL CULL THE TULLOS HILL ROE DEER.

This shocking, outrageous move by the City has prompted outrage throughout not only Aberdeen, but also throughout the world and amongst the major animal rights organisations. The City has been largely silent on the matter, and was not answering this writer’s questions and the many pleas against the cull. Local groups became active against the cull; Animal Concern started campaigning, and Lush got involved.

A team of over a dozen local animal lovers, animal rights activists and concerned people from all walks of life were on hand to give the cyclists a warm welcome. There were anti-cull campaigners from all over Aberdeenshire, Philadelphia, Australia and everywhere in between. They carried signs and handed out hundreds of flyers to passers-by and many passers by stopped to chat and voice their concern – and anger – over the Council’s threatened cull.

I spoke with Helen Patterson; she had heard about the cull on SHMU FM, Aberdeen’s local station. She phoned into the programme and has been following the matter ever since, and in her words:

“this cull is just terrible.”

The Lush involvement pretty much started when local campaigners had asked Debbie, manager at Lush Aberdeen if Lush would make the petition available in its shop for customers to sign. She sought approval and then things began to take off.

These Lush employees who spent days cycling here to highlight this sad state of affairs, also did it on their own personal holiday time. The Lush team – who are cyclists: Alan (trainee Manager at the Edinburgh shop), Hannah, Karen, Ross and Josette – truly gave a shot in the arm to campaigners here. Within an hour of their arrival, local radio Northsound and Scottish TV came down to cover the story. Lush had successfully given the issue much-needed publicity.

The cycling event is only one part of what Lush is doing – Erica from Lush did not cycle up – she had been working round the clock managing this event and its many aspects. She tells me:

“Each Lush shop has a green helper and environment representative – which is what I am.

“We keep an eye on issues, and I have been working on press releases, posters, and Facebook updates.”

Lush are giving the campaign a boost by promoting the issue on their famous, long-running ‘Charity Pot’ moisturiser.

Lush supports an astounding number of environmental, animal and human welfare initiatives around the globe; sales from the ‘Charity Pot’ moisturiser go to these charities.

The labels for the pots describe the different projects; I bought one some time back which was for an organisation opposed to the massive ‘wall of death’ fishing techniques which are depleting our oceans indiscriminately and killing seabirds. Hundreds of people visiting the Edinburgh shop were shocked to hear of this situation, and have been signing the petition and buying the ‘Charity Pots.’

Lush has always shown this dedication to environmental causes. Its products are never tested on animals; the natural ingredients are responsibly sourced and worldwide producers are paid fair value for their ingredients. There is no animal testing – but there are moves afoot in the EU which may make animal cosmetic testing a horrible reality again. If this worries you, then please contact your MEP, do some research, and say NO to this potential bureaucratic threat.

How can you help the deer?

Sign a petition – information can be found on Facebook – search for ‘Tullos Hill Roe Deer’

– or drop into Lush (Union Street near Market Street)

Write to Aileen Malone, Convener of the Aberdeen City Housing & Environment Committee

Contact your local City Councillor and tell them what you think.

Scottish Retailer Fights Against Aberdeen Deer Slaughter

Aberdeen City, Articles, Environment, Featured, News No Responses »

Apr 192011

With thanks to Alan Brown of Lush, Edinburgh

Four members of staff from Lush Cosmetics in Edinburgh embarked on Monday upon a three-day cycle from their Princes Street shop to the Lush shop in Aberdeen.
They will be wearing t-shirts bearing an image of one of the roe deer inhabiting Tullos Hill and emblazoned with the campaign’s slogan, Too Deer A Price To Pay.

They will be travelling with letters opposing the slaughter, which they will hand deliver to Aberdeen City Council.

This cycle marks Lush Edinburgh’s protest against the proposed slaughter of the roe deer that inhabit Tullos Hill in Aberdeen. Aberdeen City Council are proposing to plant trees on Tullos Hill as part of their Tree For Every Citizen scheme, but in order to protect the trees, they plan to slaughter the roe deer who have lived on the hill for generations. This is not only cruel and unnecessary, but would be ineffective as a method of tree protection.

Aberdeen City Council have responded to the numerous communications from the public opposing this cruel slaughter with an ultimatum – if the public cannot donate £225,000 to pay for tree sleeves and fencing to protect the saplings by 10th May 2011, then the slaughter will go ahead and the deer will die.

Lush Edinburgh refuse to play victim to this threat and simply wish to say to the council that they should put the Tree For Every Citizen scheme on hold until they have the means necessary to put tree protection implements into place. While they believe that planting trees is positive action, killing these animals in order to do so is completely senseless and the planting should not even be considered until humane tree protection can be put in place, so that both the trees and deer can exist.

Alan Brown, from Lush Edinburgh said:

“We applaud the council for wanting to plant trees in our community, but surely this can be done without slaughtering a herd of innocent animals. We feel that as the plans currently stand, it’s too dear a price to pay”.

From Monday 18th April until Wednesday 20th April, Lush Edinburgh and Lush Aberdeen will be donating all proceeds (minus VAT) from their popular hand and body lotion, Charity Pot, to the animal rights groups in Aberdeen.

These groups have been working incredibly hard to protest against this cull and using their own funds to pay for publicity materials for their campaign. This is applicable to both the full-size and sample-size version of the product.

Date: 20th April 2011, with cyclists arriving in Aberdeen at 1 pm.
Location: Lush Aberdeen, 81 Union St, Aberdeen

Please come along and welcome the cyclists on their arrival, and show your support for the campaign.

You can keep up to date with the cycle and the great work that they are doing to help this campaign here:
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Lush-Edinburgh/116815671689234

Lush Cosmetics, established 15 years ago, has been driven by innovation and its ethics. Creators of pioneering beauty products such as the fizzing bath ballistic, shower jellies and butter creams and solid shampoo bars, Lush places emphasis on fresh ingredients like organic fruits and vegetables.

Lush operates a strict policy against animal testing and supports Fair Trade and Community Trade initiatives. Lush leads the cosmetics industry in combating over-packaging by running public awareness campaigns and developing products that can be sold ‘naked’ to the consumer without any packaging. Lush has been awarded the RSPCA Good Business Award for 2006 and 2007 and the PETA Trailblazer Award for Animal Welfare.

More info – www.lush.co.uk

Old Susannah’s Journal No.31 – Lush Lush My Deer

Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Information, Opinion, Satire and Humour No Responses »

Apr 152011

It’s been yet another lively week in the ‘Deen; by the time this is published, Old Susannah will have been on SHMU radio discussing the fate of the Tullos Hill Roe Deer, election leaflets will be pouring through your letterbox, and petrol will reach £2 million a gallon.

At present there are still no answers to relevant, specific questions I sent to the Council’s tree men and Aileen Malone (aka ‘HoMalone’ – when left in charge of something, chaos breaks out and hilarity ensues. Well, that’s one possible origin for this nickname). But I’ll keep trying.
Those environmentally friendly folk at Lush are throwing themselves into the battle with gusto. A team is cycling up from Lush Edinburgh and should arrive around 12:30pm this coming Wednesday at the Lush shop in Aberdeen’s Union Street.

Their slogan against the cull is a good one: “Too Deer a Price.” Their efforts and those of people and organisations from local to international level might make a difference yet.

However, those nice people at the Scottish Information Commission have some concerns over one of my Freedom of Information requests, which – believe it or not – the Council answered late, answered by refusing to answer and offered to do an inquiry which might well have never happened. Another few years and I might have a good story for you. Don’t hold your breath.

Finally, you may recall that Aberdeen’s former head, Sue Bruce, landed up in a job for the City of Edinburgh, much to our great sadness. The capital has since found at least five of its employees were involved in a massive fraud to do with awarding work and projects without proper tenders taking place and paying for work that was never done.

Makes you glad to be in the Granite City where fraud is unheard of, where there is never any City employee helping the police figure find out where £300,000 of taxpayer money went, where work always goes out to tender properly and is never just given to local builders automatically. But, onwards to some defining words for this past week.

Grass:
(Noun 1) – member of herbal family of plants characterised by slender shoots of green leaf, a grazing crop suitable for herbivores such as cows and sheep. Just don’t mention the deer).
(Noun 2) – slang term for cannabis sativa, a substance which can allegedly temporarily impair the consciousness of the person who smokes or otherwise ingests the leaves and or buds of said plant.
(Verb) – to bring another’s wrongdoing to the attention of the public or authorities. All of which bring us nicely to …John Stewart, Council Leader – a man apart.

Hundreds of people heard this pearl of wisdom from JS and raced to Union Terrace Gardens with rolling paper, matches and things called bongs, only to be disappointed

His critics allegedly call him names and go to his pub to hit him. But they can’t silence him. If the Church of Scotland deserves an ASBO for not behaving as he wants it to, he’ll say so by grassing them up to the local newspapers.

It is hugely surprising that his Press & Journal claim that the Church of Scotland deserved an ASBO (see last week’s column) didn’t get taken up internationally.

Also, in a really brave move, he’s called our attention to a little-known fact. Brace yourselves: in John’s own words:

“there is not much in Union Terrace Gardens except grass.”

‘How did he work that out?’ I can hear you ask aloud as you read this over your cornflakes.

Stone me. Hundreds of people heard this pearl of wisdom from JS and raced to Union Terrace Gardens with rolling paper, matches and things called bongs, only to be disappointed. It seems that John was complaining that the parking lot to be was full of the kind of grass you walk on, or eat if you are a deer that the Council hasn’t yet shot, (sorry, culled). Either that, or he took all the funny grass for himself and his friends on the Council – that would explain quite a lot. How did our society let this happen?

“Let’s face it, Union Terrace Gardens, apart from a few trees and the floral crest, is just grass”

Our intrepid Council Leader told the Press & Journal:

“This (the design competition) is an excellent opportunity for Aberdeen to show how good it is at creating gardens. We will see what comes through from the design brief, but I am quite looking forward to seeing the designs.”

Well, so far Aberdeen City has shown how good it is at losing arts funding, keeping schools open, caring for the elderly, and ensuring that no fraudsters are operating within the council stealing hundreds of thousands of pounds. Aberdeen has also shown how good it is at propping up the AECC, selling land at millions of pounds less than market value, filling in potholes and closing libraries. A mere £140 million pound project poses little challenge – even if we have no money.

Someone in the City Council attended the meetings – yet the head of the Council claimed to have no idea the project existed

There is no reaction yet from governments in New York, Paris and London – but in light of John’s comments they will be swiftly moving to check their city centre parks for grass and make any necessary corrections. Let’s all hope that after the design contest, which we are all eagerly awaiting as we struggle to pay bills, buy food and petrol etc. will ensure that there is none of this grass-type stuff left over.

I can only hope that John stays away from grass lest his otherwise astute judgement, financial acumen, people skills and fine mind suffer.

Tory councillor Alan Donnelly quite rightly asked:

“What planet do people think we are living on if they think we would support the destruction of Union Terrace Gardens?”

Well, it could be the same planet that saw Aberdeen City’s ACSEF spending some £300k (meant for Peacock Visual Arts) on a consultation showing, er, a big concrete square where the gardens now are. That’s some coincidence.

Deja Vu
(French expression) literally ‘already seen’. A spooky feeling that you’ve been there before. As Aberdeen Voice historian Alex Mitchell alluded to in one of his excellent articles on the City’s history, the £1.2 million pounds of funding that was lost to the City as ACSEF, the City and (£750 million pound a year taxpayer funded) Scottish Enterprise bravely battled to kill Peacock Visual Arts long-planned expansion was not the first time the City scored such a colossal own goal.

Cast your mind back some 5 or 6 years.

The Citadel had been earmarked for an arts centre. It wasn’t going to be turned into a parking lot or shopping mall and there definitely weren’t going to be any deer or any grass: everyone could have been happy. The plan was written up and many meetings took place – the City, arts leaders, etc. No one knows to this day precisely why we didn’t get a plan to the Arts Council on time (spooky!).

Kilroy Silk wanted to distance himself from the party because he thought they were ridiculous. How bad is that?

Someone in the City Council attended the meetings – yet the head of the Council claimed to have no idea the project existed. If memory serves, the sum was probably £1 million and change. So if you get the feeling that your cash-strapped City had lost Arts Council funding previously – you are correct.

Was it a bit of history eerily repeating itself – or is it possible that the City has not been very well managed and organised for a few years? Something to think about. Ask your local Councillor or get out a Ouija board and try to contact the LibDems. While you’re at it; ask them about the deer, Loirston Loch, services for the elderly and school closures should you make contact.

UKIP
(collective noun) Comedy troupe such as Bremner Bird & Fortune, Monty Python, The Goonies, and the Lib Dems.

Faced with the Kafkaesque deer, Union Terrace Gardens, and Loirston Loch horror stories, we need to keep our spirits up and what organisation is better placed to give everyone a much-needed heartfelt laughing fit than the United Kingdom Independence Party?

He might not be a part of the UKIP posse any more, but the very thought of colourful (literally) TV personality Kilroy-Silk alone should get you chuckling. You might not know it, but the UKIP party has had more infighting than the SNP/Lib Dem coalition.

There apparently was a UKIP candidate in East Kilbride who had a whole laundry list of fascist policies; the UKIP mainstream disowned him. In fact Kilroy Silk wanted to distance himself from the party because he thought they were ridiculous. How bad is that? Their MEP member Nigel Farage has made some errors of judgment including appearing on Have I Got News For You (unaware that he was the biggest laugh of the night) and as well as car crash TV, this UKIP leader has serious slapstick form.

On the day of the General Election in May, Farage’s two-seater plane got entangled in a UKIP banner it was trailing and crashed shortly after take-off from an airfield in Northamptonshire – no one was hurt. Vote for them if you like – can’t be worse than what we’ve got, and they obviously have a sense of humour.

Next week: More of the same

‘Culling’ Deer – What Do We Actually Mean?

Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Featured, Information, Opinion No Responses »

Apr 152011

Voice’s Dave Watt poses the question – “When We Talk About ‘Culling’ Deer, What Do We Actually Mean?”

What this means is that a bullet and a deer’s body are going to meet at somewhere in between 600 and 3000 feet a second. (These are the figures for a hand gun and an assault rifle respectively).

So what does this mean for the unfortunate deer?

I obviously don’t have input from deer that have been shot previously but as I’m a) ex-army, b) have studied the subject of warfare quite a bit and c) have spoken to several doctors about it, I have a fair idea of the horrors which occur when a body and a bullet meet at a couple of thousand feet a second.

Richard Holmes in his book ‘The Firing Line’ points out that almost all wounds become painful when the initial shock wears off and some are utterly agonising from the start. “Wounded men scream, either because of the pain itself, or in sheer panic and terror”. Lt. Edwin Campion of Royal Warwicks described the noise coming from the darkness at Passchaendale:

“On all sides came the groans and wails of the wounded men: faint, long, sobbing moans of agony and despairing shrieks.”

Michael Herr’s description of a wounded man shot and entangled in barbed wire is equally moving:

“We heard then what sounded at first like a little girl crying”, he reported,

“a subdued delicate wailing , and as we listened it became louder and more intense, taking on pain as it grew until it became a full , piercing shriek.”

The people I’m describing here undergoing these agonies are not freaks of nature, they are people like you and me. Hit by a bullet as they were, you and I and poor old Bambi up in Tullos would cry, writhe and shriek in undignified pain just as they did. Luckily for you and me this scenario’s pretty unlikely but I’m not so sure about Bambi.

Sounds fun, doesn’t it? I bet old Bambi and his pals can hardly wait.

As a medical friend of mine pointed out, the dreadful thing about mammals is our sensitivity to pain and the equally dreadful fact that the organisms of dying mammals cling on to life with a ghastly pertinacity.

Additionally, unlike all that nonsense that Hollywood has been spouting over the years, the agony from a wound is in almost exact proportion to the severity of the wound.

Another grisly little aside to that is that unmarried men dying in the extremes of major wound agonies tend to cry on their mothers and married men on their wives. Isn’t that a lovely little statistic to take away and keep in some dark little corner of your mind? Perhaps as Bambi lies twitching in agony on the ground with his bowels loosened (yes, that happens too) he might cough out , with the spray of arterial blood, a choked cry for his ma or the cute little doe he’s been mating with. Who knows?

Even in the unlikely event that the poor old Bambi is fortunate enough to be hit with a head shot (which, despite Hollywood, are frequently not immediately fatal either) this is still hardly an enjoyable experience as Charles Carrington at the Somme had the disconcerting experience of speaking to a corporal as the man was hit by a rifle bullet:

“He was alive and then he was dying or dead, and there was nothing human left about him. He fell with a neat round hole in his forehead and the back of his head blown out.”

While Pte Le Brun of the Canadian Army referred to a comrade being killed beside him,

“His blood and brains, pieces of skull and lumps of burning hair spattered over the front of my greatcoat and gasmask”.

Sounds fun, doesn’t it? I bet old Bambi and his pals can hardly wait.

Finally, General Sir John Hackett writing an article on World War II films for the Sunday Times pointed out the inaccuracy of the depiction of casualties in Hollywood films where:

“If men are shot ….they fall down like children in a game, to lie motionless. The most harrowing thing in real battles is that usually don’t lie still; only the lucky ones die outright.”

Older Entries Newer Entries