I thank all Members who participated in the debate for their undoubted interest and the intensity of their arguments. I also thank Mr Ford for his comments. He has certainly read up on the subject, although I refute his attempt to castigate the Department and his references to inadequacies within it. Those are entirely unjustifiable.

I thank David Ford for his clarification of amendment No 1, which, taken with other amendments in that Member's name, would shorten the open season for the hare. The amendments would remove section 7(2) of the Game Preservation (Northern Ireland) Act 1928. It would reduce, by two months, the open season for pursuing or killing hares by hunting with dogs, or by coursing. The amendments would also replace the provisions of section 7D, subsection 4, of the 1928 Act, which would ban the organised coursing of Irish hares which have been trapped or netted in Northern Ireland throughout the remaining open season from 12 August to 31 January.

The amendment would not prevent imported live hares from being used in organised coursing during the open season. The remaining amendments are consequential to those two proposals. I am aware of the need to keep the hare population in Northern Ireland under review. I am also aware of the many concerns expressed by Members and by the Committee for the Environment. I pay tribute to the Committee for its help and co-operation in this matter.

As part of the wider biodiversity process, the Department has drawn up a species action plan for the Irish hare. The Environment and Heritage Service (EHS) is drawing up an implementation plan for a range of biodiversity actions. The EHS intends to publish the plan by March 2002. The plan will cover a wide variety of measures, some of which will contribute to the conservation of habitats used by the Irish hare, such as semi- natural grasslands and upland heath. Those will in turn benefit the hare and other species that share its habitats.

The Department will also undertake a repeat survey of hares to ascertain what further steps, if any, need to be taken to protect the species. However, a survey was also carried out between 1997 and 1999 in County Antrim and County Down, which was extrapolated to all Northern Ireland, that estimated that the hare population was 16,500. That figure is similar to the median hare population estimated by the Dingerkus study, which was undertaken between 1994 and 1996.

The proportion of the hare population that is affected by hunting or organised coursing is very small and is of negligible importance to both the current size of the population here and to the normal fluctuations in populations of small mammals such as the hare. Mr Ford has already mentioned ecological evidence. Such evidence indicates that the main factors limiting the hare population are the availability, non-availability and quality of habitat. That suggests that the loss of some hares would soon be compensated by the natural expansion of the population to reoccupy the vacated habitat. The amendment would encourage the undesirable practice of bringing in live hares from outside Northern Ireland.

In the light of that, and because the conservation status of the species and the issues affecting it are still under investigation, I am not in a position to support the amendment.

I thank some of the Members who spoke, and in particular Dr McCrea, to whom I should apologise. Forming these amendments depended to some extent upon the Minister's changing the long title of the Bill and, given their late timing, I was unable to mention them at the Committee meeting last week.

I thank Mr Arthur Doherty in particular for his support. I would ask on what basis Mr Mick Murphy's talk about economic benefits should be considered. If we are facing the serious and potential destruction of a mammal in the next 20 or 30 years, some minor economic benefits seem rather less important.

Mr Shannon said that hares are common on Rathlin Island and at Aldergrove. When did he last see hares in any number at Aldergrove?

In August.

I represent Aldergrove, and anyone who travels regularly through the airport knows that there are now far fewer hares than there were 10 or 20 years ago. It is deeply regrettable that, despite his having no evidence to show that the status of hares is acceptable at the moment, the Minister is unwilling to apply the precautionary principle. I will persist in promoting this amendment.

1.00 pm

Question put, That the amendment be made.

I beg to move amendment No 2: In page 1, leave out lines 7 to 9 and insert-

(bbb) any partridge during the period commencing on 1st February in any year and ending with 14th September next following;"; and'

No 3: In page 1, line 7, leave out from "any" to the end of line 9 and insert-

No 4: In page 1, line 7, leave out "or snipe". - [Mr Leslie.]

I was not expecting to address a full House on the amendment, but I shall make the most of the opportunity.

The three amendments that I have tabled relate to the main substance of the Bill, which is concerned with changing the partridge season. They also refer to snipe. I wish to speak separately about partridges and snipe because the two are - [Interruption].

Order.

The two birds are completely different. Partridges are reared; their numbers can be replaced and augmented by rearing. Without rearing, there would be no partridges in Northern Ireland and without shooting there would be no rearing of partridges. That situation is created by, and for, the shooting fraternity. Snipe, about which I shall say more later, are completely different. A snipe is a wild bird, and different considerations apply to wild birds. Some of those considerations are almost contradictory to those that apply to reared birds. I expressed reservations about those matters at Second Stage. Unfortunately, I missed the key Committee meetings, but, I expressed my reservations to the Committee and advised it of my intention to table amendments.

As regards partridges, the thrust of the first two amendments is that, instead of moving the season from its current start of 1 October to 1 September - thereby extending the season by one month - [Interruption].

Order. Members who wish to have conversations should do so in the Lobby, so that those who wish their education to be enlarged may hear what Mr Leslie has to say.

I suggest that, instead of extending the partridge season by one month, we should compromise on two weeks, starting the season in the middle of September. The reason is that it is difficult to be sure of producing fully mature partridges by 1 September. I cite as evidence for that the fact that few shoots, even in the south of England, would start shooting partridges on 1 September even though they are entitled to do so under the Regulations. There is no question but that mature partridges can be produced quickly. It would involve a bit of interfering with the breeding cycle, but modern genetics has no difficulty with that. It would involve stuffing a lot of antibiotics into the partridges.

There is another reason why it is a bad idea. My hope is that we can re-introduce the grey partridge into Northern Ireland and introduce the red-legged, or French, partridge as a wild bird. However, birds stuffed full of antibiotics will not make it in the wild. They will just about last out the shooting season, and are unlikely to form wild breeding stock. That is another reason why we are not proceeding by the optimum means.

At Second Stage, and in subsequent discussions, I was concerned to hear that the main argument advanced was that there were important commercial considerations and that increasing the partridge season by a month would be of great commercial value. That is not a good argument for shooting. The preservation of wildlife, the enhancement of its habitat and caring for that wildlife - matters discussed earlier in the debate about hares - are the arguments that I would advance in favour of shooting. I am uncomfortable with the commercial argument. As I said, I acknowledge that, as agricultural practices change and the areas of cultivated land in Northern Ireland are likely to decline, people will seek other uses for that land. A reasonable use would be more widespread shooting, most of which would be commercial.

The people best placed to judge whether partridges are fit to shoot on 1 September would be those who rear them or the people in charge of the shoot. I entirely accept that. Unfortunately, that is where we bump into a problem with advancing the commercial argument for partridge shooting. Someone may have booked a group of people from abroad - Italy, for example, which is typically a place where they would come from - to come and shoot partridges in Northern Ireland during the first week of September. If it is discovered in early or mid-August that the partridges will not be ready, it is unlikely that people will be able to re-arrange their plans. Judgements about the state of the partridges will be made after the bookings have been made. If groups of foreign visitors come to Northern Ireland to shoot partridges during the first two weeks of September, those partridges will be shot whether they are ready or not. Therefore, despite the best intentions, there is the potential for shooting - perhaps inadvertently - to get itself a bad name. The commercial arguments are flawed.

It is safe to start the season on 1 October. However, people with long experience of rearing partridges without genetic modification have told me that they would be unsure about the strength of their birds by that date. If compromise is reached and the season begins in mid- September, shooting will take place in a proper and sporting manner.

Shooting has another value for partridges. Partridges live in family groups called covies. One of the benefits of shooting is that it breaks up those covies. Partridges then mix and breed with other covies in the wild. One reason why native grey partridges died out in Northern Ireland was that they remained in their own covies and interbred and, as a result, weakened their own stock. That was quite apart from their other problems, such as loss of habitat and predators. There are some grey partridges left in the Republic of Ireland. With the current enthusiasm for the reintroduction of the grey partridge, it may be possible to reinstate the breed. The enthusiasm of the shooting fraternity would be essential to that.

Those are the reasons why I believe that the House should extend the partridge season by, at most, a fortnight, and not by a month as is proposed in the Bill.

The snipe season starts on 1 September and ends on 31 January. That was set by a 1954 amendment to the Game Preservation Act (Northern Ireland) 1928, consolidating into the main legislation the current practice of shooting snipe. The House should consider whether it is appropriate to consolidate the season on those dates, rather than shorten it by a month. If the snipe season were to start on 1 October, it would be set on the same basis as the woodcock season. The woodcock is the other principal wild bird shot in Northern Ireland. Snipe numbers, having fallen to a worryingly low level a few years ago, seem to have revived recently. There is no argument that numbers are falling; they appear to be rising. However, I repeat my dissatisfaction with the commercial argument. Unfortunately, some commercial shooting of snipe is taking place. We must be cautious about that, because wild birds that are shot commercially cannot be replaced by breeding. It is likely that if the season for the commercial shooting of partridges is extended, visiting sportsmen will be tempted to have another couple of days' sport by increasing the shooting of wild snipe. It would, therefore, be prudent to reduce the snipe season by a month and start it from 1 October.

Currently, self-regulation within shooting preserves the snipe population. However, there is always the danger that commercial interests can occasionally intervene to overcome the best instincts of self-regulation. It would be sensible to amend that rule and to remove some of that temptation. The biggest self-regulator of the shooting of snipe in September is the snipe. There are few of them to be found in Northern Ireland at that time, unlike in Scotland.

Amendment No 2 would confirm the snipe season as it is, and it would vary the proposal on the partridge season to the compromise position of having the season start in the middle of September. Amendment No 3 would also compromise on the partridge season at mid-September, but it would shorten the snipe season, starting it on the same day as the woodcock season, which is 1 October.

Amendment No 4 is a saver, in that it accepts that the partridge season should start on 1 September, but leaves out the words "or snipe". That would put snipe into the "any other game bird" category, the result being that the snipe season would start on 1 October.

I am a member of the British Association for Shooting and Conservation (BASC), the voice of the shooting fraternity, which has a degree of professionalism that is the envy of many other bodies representing sporting interests and other outdoor recreational pursuits. BASC has approximately 6,000 subscribing members and is recognised as an authoritative voice by statutory and voluntary agencies in Northern Ireland. The association, together with participants in the sport of shooting, contributes an estimated £15 million to the Northern Ireland economy annually.

The principal objective of the Game Preservation (Amendment) Bill is to extend the annual shooting season for partridge so that it commences on 1 September. That change will bring the shooting season for partridges into line with Scotland, England and Wales.

A public consultation exercise showed that a majority was in favour of commencing the shooting season for partridge on 1 September. The Committee for the Environment considered the matter in detail and supported the extension to the shooting season. I draw Members' attention to paragraph 10 of the explanatory and financial memorandum, which shows the wide variety of opinion that supported the Bill.

The concern that partridges are immature by 1 September is unfounded. It is close to suggesting that there is a level of irresponsibility in the management of shoots across the Province. BASC is widely accepted as the foremost authority on the management of shooting in Northern Ireland. It is the view of the organisation - I share the view - that with appropriate management partridges can be fully mature by 1 September. Many factors have a direct effect on the maturity of game birds that are reared and released. Dates of release, stocking densities, habitat type, weather conditions, diet and the prevalence of disease and its treatment, among other factors, will determine how partridges develop.

The shoot manager is the appropriate person to decide whether partridge are sufficiently mature to present a sporting opportunity. The code of good shooting practice, which is supported by all the major shooting organisations, makes specific provision for the rearing and release of game birds, including partridge. It is widely accepted that there is a high level of self-regulation in shooting sports, and there is no evidence of bad practice in game management.

The amendments are unnecessary and will defeat the principal purpose of the Bill, which is to bring shooting practices in Northern Ireland into line with the rest of the United Kingdom.

I oppose the amendments put forward by Mr Leslie for several reasons. The consultation process has taken upwards of three years to complete. It involved individuals and the shooting organisations - the BASC and the Countryside Alliance in Northern Ireland. It also involved game conservation interests, individual farmers and shoot owners. The consultation was wide and far- reaching.

Like many others, I believe that the proposal put forward by Mr Leslie to change the date from 1 to 15 September does not add up. Indeed, his arguments are suspect. Shooting sports are already self-regulating. I said that in the last debate. The contribution of countryside sports cannot be ignored. The people involved in countryside sports have been actively involved in conservation. Conservation is high on their agenda. They are the ones who have planted the trees, created the ponds and maintained the hedgerows; they have reared and released the birds. We must underline the contribution that they have made.

I also want to consider tourism. There is potential for greater tourism, which can be realised and which will be to the benefit of many people. One example - not in my constituency but in the constituency of my Colleagues from North Antrim - is Rathlin Island. A very successful partridge shoot takes place there. The islanders have tried to bring people in specifically to take advantage of the opportunities for partridge shooting.

In Strangford, we have various shoots - Portaferry, Greyabbey and Ballywalter to name but three. There are many others involving the release of partridge for shooting on the Ards Peninsula. Again, those have shown the potential to create employment - [Interruption].

Order.

They give an economic boost to people who live in the area. There are benefits for the owners of bed and breakfast accommodation, hotels and restaurants - indeed, for many of the people who live in that area. Our agriculture industry and our countryside need that economic benefit, they need it quickly. The amendments put forward by Mr Leslie have not addressed those issues.

Pheasant shooting takes place on 1 October. In most cases, people do not shoot the pheasants until the end of October, primarily because the birds are not mature enough. However, there are occasions in early October when it would be suitable to go out and take advantage of mature pheasant shooting. The same thing applies to partridge shooting. Partridge mature more quickly than pheasant, mallard or any other bird. They are ready for thriving in the countryside, they are healthy enough to live in the wilds, and they are ready for pursuit at 1 September. It does not matter whether it is at 15 September, as suggested by Mr Leslie. It does not make any difference - the birds are mature on 1 September. The climate here suits them. Indeed, it ensures that those birds are - [Interruption].

Is that why they became extinct?

Reared partridge are not extinct, but perhaps the Member did not know that. We need a system - [Interruption].

Would the Member confirm that his party is split on the early release of partridges?

Given where the Member is now seated in the House, it ill becomes him to judge whether other parties are split or not. I would, however, say that while I understand that the House may not have an intimate interest in the question of partridge, I would have thought that the issue of snipe was one to which Members could have paid at least some attention.

Mr Speaker, I thank you for your comments. We must take all the important issues into consideration. The climate here suits the early release of partridge. It is down to the gamekeepers, to the shoot organisers and to the syndicates - they know whether the partridge are sufficiently mature and ready to pursue as rough shooting.

The organisations have supported the change in the legislation, which will bring us in line with England, Scotland and Wales, and also with Éire. It makes sense to have the same legislation here as across the water.

The amendments put forward by Mr Leslie are unnecessary and unworkable and do not address the issue. I had the pleasure of being in Mr Leslie's company at a shoot at Ballydugan just over a year ago. I suspect that his amendments are similar to his shooting - way off target.

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I know nothing whatsoever about this subject, other than - [Interruption].

Order.

- other than the advice that has been offered from the opposite side of the House. However, I found the work of the Committee interesting. Mr Leslie said that he had concerns and reserved the right to bring them to the attention of the Assembly. I remain unconvinced that his amendment would have any appreciable benefit in relation to the concerns that he addressed. Advancing the season by a fortnight would have a negligible effect.

I am more concerned about endangered species - and I acknowledge that the Minister responded when these matters were raised. If there is the ability under statutory regulation to monitor and respond in order to provide the necessary protections, then I will be interested to hear the proposals or policy that the Minister will announce.

I have no interest in the sport of hunting - I have an instinct against it. However, I recognise that there is a legitimate constituency of people who derive pleasure from the sport. The efficacy of self-regulation will always be subject to debate between those who oppose and those who support. No evidence has been produced to support the amendments before us today. Therefore I support the view taken by the Environment Committee.

I am not a member of the Environment Committee - I wish I were - although I sometimes go along and listen. Some of the subjects discussed, including this one, are extremely interesting. I have not heard the full debate on this issue in the Committee, and many points have been made behind closed doors that I am not aware of. I understand that Mr Leslie raised these matters at the Committee, and they were debated. However, he was unsuccessful.

I draw to the House's attention and that of my hon Friend the fact that our Committee is 99% open, and not behind closed doors.

I accept the hon Member's point. He is the very wise Chairperson of that Committee, and I have seen him in action. He has always tolerated my coming along to listen as the unofficial member of the Environment Committee, and I stand corrected.

I am conscious that I have not heard the various arguments. Some of Mr Leslie's arguments have considerable merit, but - as I will clarify later on - I will not be supporting them.

I was formerly employed by the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds in monitoring wildfowling activity in the Lough Neagh area. If what I saw of the self- regulation of the shooting fraternity is anything to go by, then it is no regulation whatsoever. There are many instances of young birds, which are barely capable of flapping along the surface of Lough Neagh, being shot on 1 September. There does not seem to be any regard in the shooting fraternity for the age of the bird or its ability to escape. Assurances given by the partridge- shooting fraternity that they will ensure through self- regulation that young birds that cannot escape are not shot are frankly - [Interruption].

Has the Member informed any of the shooting organisations, or the police, about these incidents? Does anyone else know about them apart from himself?

The incidents that I referred to are not illegal, because 1 September is recognised in law as the start of the wildfowling season. For instance, it is not unusual for tufted duck to produce young out of the nest by 16 August. The ducklings are in no position to escape being shot, but are shot nonetheless. I am not alleging anything improper or illegal - [Interruption].

Has the Member seen any of these incidents?

I certainly have. Undoubtedly there will be those on the opposite Benches who will leap upon this as a split - [Interruption].

I ask the Member who was speaking from a sedentary position to communicate in the normal fashion through the Chair.

Stop sniping.

Stop sniping, indeed. I can say to the Members on my left that this is the only split that they will ever see in the DUP. It is an indication of how united we are. Had they been with us on Saturday they would have seen a very united party indeed.

Is the Member telling us that he is in favour of the early release of partridges; the harmonisation of legislation with the Irish Republic, and the non-decommissioning of weapons?

I am sorry, Mr Speaker. Some of that was so deep that I missed it completely. It obviously escaped the entire House also. I am not in favour of harmonisation with any foreign state, including the Irish Republic. However, I am favour of actions being taken to ensure that young birds cannot be shot.

I will be totally honest and frank. How anyone could find entertainment and amusement from going out on a Saturday morning to shoot a wild bird totally escapes me. That is my personal opinion. However, I understand that there are others, in the House and in the community, who have a totally different view, to which they are entitled, as long as they remain within the law. I could not shoot a wild bird for sport.

Various points were made earlier about the so-called need for this. Mr Shannon, for instance, is a tall, well-built gentleman. No one can tell me that he needs to shoot for food to maintain his welfare, or that of his three children. I suspect that they may well be able to maintain a sensible lifestyle without the need for game birds.

This is being done entirely for enjoyment. I find that very difficult to accept, but there are others who have a different opinion. There are enormous pressures, however, on the managers of shooting estates to ensure that when parties arrive either from Northern Ireland or other parts of the United Kingdom, the birds are available to be shot. Those groups may be paying several thousand pounds. How can the manager tell them that they cannot shoot on a particular day because the birds are not mature enough? The economics are such that that is simply not possible. We have to establish in statute a date on which we can be fairly certain that the birds will be, by the natural way of things, ready to be shot and able to escape.

I disagree with Mr Leslie on the point about snipe. Snipe are currently under enormous pressure in Northern Ireland and throughout western Europe. The evidence from surveys in Britain has shown that the snipe population has fallen by 80% since 1970. In Northern Ireland, between 1987 and 1995, it has fallen by 22%. I took part in the survey in 1987 that established the baseline population figure.

The difficulty is that in winter, there is a large influx of Continental snipe into Northern Ireland, as well as jacksnipe. There are two species - jacksnipe, which is protected, and common snipe, which is not. Whilst the Continental population has remained fairly stable, the British - and by that I mean including Northern Ireland - population has declined quite dramatically. The difficulty is that the shooter cannot distinguish between British-bred snipe and Continental snipe. They are identical, so the Northern Ireland snipe population is shot along with the Continental immigrants. We should be restricting the shooting season for snipe to as short a period as possible because of the impact on the local snipe population. Therefore there is some merit in what Mr Leslie says. However, I was not at the Committee session to hear the counter- arguments, so I shall not be voting for the amendment.

I must nail the false view that shooters are the great supporters of conservation and that it is in their interest to maintain healthy stocks of wild birds for shooting. If only that were true. However, there has been a dramatic decline in many prey species in the past 30 years, and it has not been the shooting fraternity that has introduced conservation measures to protect them. Organisations such as the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB), the National Trust, the Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust (WWT) and similar organisations have acquired refuges to protect populations of endangered species.

I wish to correct the fallacy that the Member is trying to put about that the shooting fraternity plays little or no part in conservation. Were it not for the shooting fraternity, the cock pheasant - indeed, all pheasants - would probably be extinct in Northern Ireland. It is wrong for Mr Wells to suggest that the shooting fraternity is a selfish, indulgent crowd of people. It is the greatest conservationist of wildlife in Northern Ireland. I accept that other organisations, some of whom the Member has mentioned, play a significant part in conservation. I would like Mr Wells to withdraw his suggestion that the shooting fraternity has no concern for the preservation of wildlife.

There is a slight divergence of emphasis between myself and the DUP's Chief Whip. I suspect that there is a grey area that needs to be examined. I accept that Mr Morrow is an expert on shooting and I am not; I derive no enjoyment from killing wild animals.

However, Mr Morrow's point is not borne out by the facts. Mr Leslie said that the shooting fraternity had preserved the partridge and that it was its aim to preserve the partridge for shooting. If that were so, why did the partridge become extinct in Northern Ireland in 1978? Granted, it was reintroduced by shooting interests, but if they had been protecting that species in the wild for shooting, why did it disappear? Why has the Irish hare population collapsed if those individuals protect and conserve its habitat?

Wildlife in Northern Ireland is under enormous pressure as a result of the intensification of agriculture. Hedges are being uprooted, and wetlands are being drained.

Will the Member give way?

Order. I need to keep some kind of control over this debate. There is obviously an element of control within the party that is properly the role of the Chief Whip. However, when it comes to debates in the House it moves to another place. If the Member wishes to speak, I am happy to call him to do so, but repeated interventions are not appropriate.

Are you protecting - [Interruption].

I shall continue with my winding-up speech, Mr Speaker.

There is the question of endangered species.

The factors that I have mentioned are leading to the dramatic decline of wildlife in Northern Ireland. The shooting fraternity, whether it is conserving or otherwise, has little or no impact on that situation. Nobody can do anything about it. However, I shall bow to greater knowledge on the issue. I was not at the Committee session; I did not hear the debate. Therefore it would be unfair of me to make a judgement having heard only one side of the story. I shall abstain on the motion.

I commend Members for showing such interest in the debate. There is a feeling of concern, not TLC - tender loving care - for the subject. Much sniping has also been going on, so much so that I feel like a lion among a den of Daniels.

Amendment No 2, which was tabled by Mr Leslie, proposes that the close season for snipe end on 31 August, as detailed in clause 1 of the Bill, and that the close season for partridge end on 14 September and not 31 August, as detailed in the same clause.

Amendment No 3, tabled by Mr Leslie, reiterates the proposal contained in the second part of amendment No 2 pertaining to the close season for partridge, as contained in clause 1 of the Bill. Amendment No 4, tabled by Mr Leslie, proposes that snipe should be deleted from the provisions of clause 1 of the Bill.

The proposals contained in amendments No 2 and No 3 pertaining to partridges would reduce the new September season to two weeks, considerably eroding the prime purpose of the Bill. It would also run counter to the overwhelming support received for the measure generally, and particularly from sporting interests.

The advice given to the Assembly at the Second Stage of the Bill, and consequently to the Committee for the Environment, is that normally the birds are fully mature in September and - and I must emphasise this - that no responsible manager would wish to bring the sport into disrepute by releasing birds that were not fully mature. Such action would not be considered good sporting practice. I am confident that game managers will act responsibly in this.

The British Association for Shooting and Conservation and the Countryside Alliance, Northern Ireland, supported this view in their evidence to the Committee for the Environment. The Committee indicated that in its report on the Bill and said that it was content with the proposal as contained in clause 1. The proposed extension will bring the legislation here into line with that in the rest of the United Kingdom, where the maturity of the birds has not been an issue.

With regard to amendment No 4 tabled by Mr Leslie, a statutory rule specifying the close season for snipe from 1 February to 31 August has been in force since 1 September 1954, which is, coincidentally, the same as the close season now being proposed for partridge in clause 1. As Mr Leslie has already said, the purpose of including snipe in clause 1 is to clarify the position within the context of the Game Preservation Act (Northern Ireland) 1928. Its inclusion in the Bill will mean no change in the law for shooting snipe.

There is some reference to the numbers of snipe, and contrary to what Mr Wells has said, there is no evidence to suggest that the numbers of snipe are affected by shooting. The 1999-00 survey showed that there are more snipe in Northern Ireland since 1996, when the number was exceptionally high. I know Mr Leslie and others have considerable experience, and I fully recognise their concerns. However, for the reasons I have given I have decided not to accept these three amendments.

I thank the Members who have contributed. We have had a worthwhile discussion on this.

There are two matters here. Most Members addressed the matter of partridges, which is the main issue in the Bill. Less was said on the subject of snipe, which, as I said earlier, are different, being wild birds. I can see that snipe numbers could be an issue for a long time. My observation is that numbers have increased over the past four or five years. I would not be able to dispute with Mr Wells how numbers compare with numbers in 1970 - I see that Mr Wells has left us. They are probably lower now than they were then, but they are higher now than they were five years ago. It is difficult to count snipe - almost as difficult as it is to shoot them.

Mr Jim Wilson declared his membership of the British Association for Shooting and Conservation. I am a member of the Countryside Alliance, which does not have any bearing on this. I said in the Second Stage debate that I rear, shoot and eat partridges.

It is wrong to make absolute declarations on the maturity of partridges. They are capable of being mature by 1 September, and if you seek that, you can achieve it, but not always. I know people who rear partridges and gamekeepers who keep them and arrange for them to be shot. Those people do not believe that it is realistic to have them mature by 1 September - some think it is quite difficult to do even by 1 October. It depends on how natural or unnatural the methods are. It also depends on the region. The chances of getting the birds ready early are better in the southern area. People are wrong to declare that it is a matter of absolutes. If self-regulation of the industry is used, I trust that it will work properly.

It has been amusing to watch the contortions that Mr Wells went through to avoid any idea that there might be a split in his party while at the same time supporting and enhancing all my arguments. It is a relief to Members on the Ulster Unionist Benches that all Members are free to argue their point of view, declare their intentions and vote accordingly despite the fact that they may not have the same view as their party Colleagues.

I point out to the House that if amendment No 2 is made, amendments No 3 and No 4 automatically fall. Should amendment No 2 fall, the mover will decide if he wishes to move amendment No 3. If so, it will be put to the House, and so on.

Question, That amendment No. 2 be made, put and negatived.

The Noes have it, as Mr Byrne said, "just by a hair".

Amendment No 3 proposed: In page 1, line 7, leave out from "any" to end of line 9 and insert -

Question, That the amendment be made, put and negatived.

Amendment No 4 proposed: In page 1, line 7, leave out "or snipe". - [Mr Leslie.]

Question, That the amendment be made, put and negatived.

TOP

<< Prev / Next >>