Rare white deer shot because it was getting dark.

Minusorange said:
Looking at the update on the BBC on this it says the officers tried for 9 hours to sedate the animal, seems like that info was intentionally omitted from the original article in order to fuel the anger from people
Click to expand...

Seems even more relevant that they should have appropriate contacts/contract in place to deal with this sort of thing.

I still feel this goes over the line of self defence/defence of others and more on executioner, and this is why I feel uneasy about it.
 
visibleman said:
Perhaps the information wasn't available at the time of the first publication :confused:
Either way, it seems the Police attempted to help the creature for a fair amount of time which is fairly impressive considering they (typically) get little to none formal wildlife/animal-welfare training.
Click to expand...

It's important info though that changes the narrative from the original article which made it look like the police couldn't be bothered finding a solution where the Deer lives and killed it because it was being inconvenient. It's pretty poor journalism from the BBC to lead with that original article which either intentionally or carelessly (both are bad) omits critical information of the story
 
Trifid said:
Seems even more relevant that they should have appropriate contacts/contract in place to deal with this sort of thing.

I still feel this goes over the line of self defence/defence of others and more on executioner, and this is why I feel uneasy about it.
Click to expand...

Other than the vet who was there keeping an eye on the welfare of the animal, the article clearly states 'police said they were "unable to get assistance" after making enquiries "to find an organisation who could assist with recovering the deer safely"'.

Considering the Police are here to protect the public and aren't typically trained for these scenarios, i'm not sure they had many options other than to a) leave it be and hope that it doesn't hurt itself, a member of the public or damage any property, or b) "deal" with the situation as best and as efficiently as they can, using the training they know/have had.
They were "damned if you do and damned if you don't".

I think organisations, like the RSPCA, should be forced to assist in these situations rather than be able to brush it off with a "it'll be fine".

Minusorange said:
It's important info though that changes the narrative from the original article which made it look like the police couldn't be bothered finding a solution where the Deer lives and killed it because it was being inconvenient. It's pretty poor journalism from the BBC to lead with that original article which either intentionally or carelessly (both are bad) omits critical information of the story
Click to expand...

Sure and i agree it does change the narrative some what. But you're suggesting the BBC, and any one else that reported the same, did it for malicious intent when in reality, and typically what happens, the journalist was given a police report and told (by the editor etc) they have X minutes to publish an article - which doesn't give them much time to fact check or gather additional information.
 
visibleman said:
Other than the vet who was there keeping an eye on the welfare of the animal, the article clearly states 'police said they were "unable to get assistance" after making enquiries "to find an organisation who could assist with recovering the deer safely"'.

Considering the Police are here to protect the public and aren't typically trained for these scenarios, i'm not sure they had many options other than to a) leave it be and hope that it doesn't hurt itself, a member of the public or damage any property, or b) "deal" with the situation as best and as efficiently as they can, using the training they know/have had.
They were "damned if you do and damned if you don't".

I think organisations, like the RSPCA, should be forced to assist in these situations rather than be able to brush it off with a "it'll be fine".
Click to expand...

Is it unusual to expect the police to have a clear plan for dealing with large and potentially dangerous wild animals? Their plan seems to be to call RSPCA who shrugged their shoulders (not overly surprised) and then spend hours calling around other places randomly to see if they can deal with it. I'd have expected there was a clear plan to call x company/organisation who they have a contract with to handle the animal.

The result is, they pushed the animal further into a place that caused more distress and then shot it. As said, I am disappointed in what happened and hope they are better prepared next time.


Edit: I don't doubt the police did everything they could in the moment, I just see a failure in scenario planning and I hope they learn from it in that force and others.
 
Last edited:
visibleman said:
Sure and i agree it does change the narrative some what. But you're suggesting the BBC, and any one else that reported the same, did it for malicious intent when in reality, and typically what happens, the journalist was given a police report and told (by the editor etc) they have X minutes to publish an article - which doesn't give them much time to fact check or gather additional information.
Click to expand...

It's why I said either intentionally or carelessly, it wouldn't be the first time or last a media organisation has missed out information in order to drive a specific narrative though (just look at fuel crisis) so it's entirely possible it could be intentional
 
Trifid said:
I politely disagree. Many events are rare but should be planned for.
Click to expand...

Oh I agree they should be planned for, but my answer was in response to your question of whether the police should have a plan and tender in place for doing so. There's plenty of scope for other organisations/agencies to take on primacy for such incidents, instead of tying up police resources including an ARV on a Saturday nightshift.
 
TheVoice said:
Oh I agree they should be planned for, but my answer was in response to your question of whether the police should have a plan and tender in place for doing so. There's plenty of scope for other organisations/agencies to take on primacy for such incidents, instead of tying up police resources including an ARV on a Saturday nightshift.
Click to expand...
Yet the Police decided that they were qualified to do a risk assessment on the animal's potential danger, which would have to take into account the animal's likely/potential behaviour.

They had a vet on-site, did the vet recommend termination?

Who decided that the risk of the animal to the public was significant enough to kill the animal? Are the Police trained to make such risk assessments? I'm guessing they have some training wrt dangerous dogs, etc...

Ultimately the RSPCA (as much as I dislike them) told the Police to just let it be. The Police determined the risk posed was great enough to terminate the animal. But why?
 
TheVoice said:
Oh I agree they should be planned for, but my answer was in response to your question of whether the police should have a plan and tender in place for doing so. There's plenty of scope for other organisations/agencies to take on primacy for such incidents, instead of tying up police resources including an ARV on a Saturday nightshift.
Click to expand...


I agree with your police resources point. As for tender, I'd look to test the market in response to this for a zero cost contract with call out charges. Yes I expect the call out cost to be fairly high, but definitely better use of police resources to get the situation dealt with quicker.


FoxEye said:
Yet the Police decided that they were qualified to do a risk assessment on the animal's potential danger, which would have to take into account the animal's likely/potential behaviour.

They had a vet on-site, did the vet recommend termination?

Who decided that the risk of the animal to the public was significant enough to kill the animal? Are the Police trained to make such risk assessments? I'm guessing they have some training wrt dangerous dogs, etc...

Ultimately the RSPCA (as much as I dislike them) told the Police to just let it be. The Police determined the risk posed was great enough to terminate the animal. But why?
Click to expand...


I'm not surprised with the final termination of the deer based on how the events panned out. I just hope they will be dealt with better next time.
 
Jean-F said:
Fair enough, no argument there, the city/town bit was running
around in my head as I was facetiously composing the post.
Click to expand...
I'm also not originally from here, so I love teasing the locals about how many times this massive place has had it's bid for city status rejected! :D

visibleman said:
Cool. I live in the countryside where deer (along with muntjacs) play chicken with artics, and the occasional car that ends up getting written off, instead of keeping to the woods and forests that straddle the A/B roads - if they're unpredictable here, i can only imagine it's worse in a town or city.
Click to expand...
Being almost a city, we have many 'green spaces' where these fellas live... kinda like London, really.
TBH, you'd think, with so many city people all having decent urban internet access to Google, that at least one of them would have looked up how to deal with errant deer...

visibleman said:
Either way, it seems the Police attempted to help the creature for a fair amount of time which is fairly impressive considering they (typically) get little to none formal wildlife/animal-welfare training.
Click to expand...
I have no training, formal or otherwise, yet still figured out how to deal with such a situation... twice!! It's really not rocket science, or even Caesar Milan mysticism!!
As for the Police - They have dog handlers and horse riders, both of whom will have at least some idea of how to handle a big, dangerous animal when it's scared out of its wits.
 
Trifid said:
Seems even more relevant that they should have appropriate contacts/contract in place to deal with this sort of thing.

I still feel this goes over the line of self defence/defence of others and more on executioner, and this is why I feel uneasy about it.
Click to expand...


Well they shot it around 8am Sunday. So you think the Merseyside police need an on call vet licensed to use a tranq gun available at 3am on a Sunday?


Seriously?
 
FoxEye said:
Welcome to the human race. The only life that has any value attached is human life.

And the police are terrified of being sued. Karen, 35, told reporters, "Ermagerd, I saw a deer, and my darling daughter was so shocked she started crying! I demand compensation! She could have trod in some deer poo! Won't somebody think of the children? We can't have deer living in places that are clearly for humans only. We own this planet, dammit. I wish they'd shoot the pigeons, too. And the foxes."
Click to expand...

If ever there was an argument for a 'like' or '+1' button on the forum this was it. :D
 
FoxEye said:
Welcome to the human race. The only life that has any value attached is human life.

And the police are terrified of being sued. Karen, 35, told reporters, "Ermagerd, I saw a deer, and my darling daughter was so shocked she started crying! I demand compensation! She could have trod in some deer poo! Won't somebody think of the children? We can't have deer living in places that are clearly for humans only. We own this planet, dammit. I wish they'd shoot the pigeons, too. And the foxes."
Click to expand...

Oh **** off unless you're willing for albinos to get put ahead of you on the nhs
 
Tefal said:
Well they shot it around 8am Sunday. So you think the Merseyside police need an on call vet licensed to use a tranq gun available at 3am on a Sunday?


Seriously?
Click to expand...


You're right. How silly of me to think that testing the market in more controlled conditions might have yielded different results. It is best we just call the executioner first from now on, would have saved everyone some time and distress of the animal. :rolleyes:


I'm going to leave this thread and be a little saddened about this on my own, so you can save a reply.
 
Tefal said:
Well they shot it around 8am Sunday. So you think the Merseyside police need an on call vet licensed to use a tranq gun available at 3am on a Sunday?


Seriously?
Click to expand...

No, they just need the phone number of a vet who can do it. You know vets take out of hours calls all the time right?

Seriously..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom