To recommend that, following the local elections in May 2011, a scrutiny committee consider carrying out an urgent investigation into the impact wild boar are having on our environment and tourism. The investigation should consider the health and safety implications of the devastation of the grass verges, particularly those in the council’s ownership.

Cllr Sterry proposed and Cllr Morgan seconded the motion as at the agenda.

Introducing her motion Cllr Sterry emphasised that it was not about the boar per se but about the damage. She asserted that all authorities involved seemed to have accepted the status quo and no one was accepting responsibility. She remembered the outcry and immediate action when the verges had become overgrown after the removal of the sheep during the foot-and-mouth epidemic. She had visited Gloucestershire Highways to ask what it was doing about the verges now and about how it worked with the Forestry Commission (Forest Enterprise), but had received no response. Residents and members were privileged custodians of the forest and the council was right to promote tourism. However people should be able to walk along the roadside verges safely without the need for pavements, which she believed were unwelcome. The authorities had a duty of care and could be heading for claims from tourists and residents with ankle injuries caused by the uneven verges. The problem was not confined to Beechenhurst, but there was continual damage everywhere. The council itself was responsible for the verges in its industrial estate at Forest Vale. To do nothing was not an option; action was needed immediately.

Cllr Hale, who had chaired the task group considering this issue, said that one of its recommendations was to review the situation every six months. Kevin Stannard, Forestry Commission, had agreed and had been to a recent scrutiny committee meeting. The Forestry Commission had very recently published a draft management plan for consultation. The plan mentioned damage, considering its impact dependent on how close to people’s lives the boar came. He also stated that a survey concluded that tourists and residents wanted the boar to stay. He proposed a friendly amendment, which Cllr Sterry accepted. The amended motion reads as follows:

To recommend that, following the local elections in May 2011, a scrutiny committee consider carrying out an urgent investigation into the impact wild boar are having on our environment and tourism. The investigation should consider the health and safety implications of the devastation of the grass verges, particularly those in the council’s ownership.

To recommend that the council write to the Forestry Commission and Gloucestershire Highways requesting them to inform the council how they are responding to the impact wild boar are having on our environment and tourism.

Cllr Gardiner said that it was a good motion, which did not ask for the boar to be moved. He suggested that the boar be ringed.

Cllr Shenoi pleaded for tolerance towards other creatures and an appreciation of the forest landscape. The council should not be anti-boar or anti-sheep.

Cllr Horne suggested controlling boar movements using pepper.

Cllr Hogan commented that the council needed to ensure that a balanced management plan was achieved. He recognised that it was difficult because the boar lived closer to humans than in other European countries and had become less wild. He asserted that since most of the damage caused by foraging occurred in the winter, now was the right time of year to undertake repairs. He believed that the motion should demand that something be done.

Cllr Fraser maintained that currently culling was not being done properly and that most boar killed were shot by poachers.

Cllr Sterry raised a point of order, reminding members that her motion was not about whether the boar should be in the forest or not, but simply about what the council and other responsible bodies were doing about the damage.

Cllr Fraser said that in Germany and France there were techniques for repairing verges involving chain harrowing, which stimulated grass growth. He expressed his support for the motion.

Cllr Amos said that the council did not need to recommend writing, but could write immediately. Some wording in the motion needed to be changed to reflect council owned land and who was being asked to deal with it.

Cllr Aburrow proposed and Cllr Kirkpatrick seconded an amendment to remove the following words in the first paragraph: ‘particularly those in the council’s ownership’.

Cllr Molyneux agreed that a balanced approach should be taken, suggesting the replacement of emotive words such as devastation to describe an animal’s natural behaviour. Tourists may regard the effects of foraging simply as evidence of wild life. He suggested replacing ‘devastation of the grass verges’ with ‘the result of boars mooting on the verges’.

Cllr Sterry refused to accept the suggestion, stating that the residents of the district had to see the verges every day.

Cllr Morgan believed that members were overcomplicating the issue, which was simply about repairing the damage. To walk on the verges was very difficult, as would be trying to mow them. He suggested that the responsible authorities used chain harrows.

Cllr Edwards commented that damage was inevitable with boar in the forest, but agreed that the matter needed balanced management.

Cllr Riley said that it was right to do something about the situation, but he remembered Kevin Stannard saying that the ‘wilderness’ created by the boar could enhance the environment and biodiversity.

Cllr Burford remembered that one of the task group recommendations was that the boar be kept out of contact of the population. The boars’ natural environment was not roadside verges nor Forest Vale nor recreational areas. If humans had caused the damage, the responsible authorities would have repaired it very quickly. All damage should be repaired, whatever the cause.

Cllr Thomson thought that the council should go back to the task group report, look at how it suggested mitigating damage and strengthen recommendations if necessary.

Summing up Cllr Sterry said that she hoped the council would not be discussing the matter in 50 years’ time as it was in the case of the sheep. The key concern for residents was that there was a lot of damage, which must be addressed immediately. It was essential not to wait.

RESOLVED -

To recommend that, following the local elections in May 2011, a scrutiny committee consider carrying out an urgent investigation into the impact wild boar are having on our environment and tourism. The investigation should consider the health and safety implications of the devastation of the grass verges, particularly those in the council’s ownership.

To recommend that the council write to the Forestry Commission and Gloucestershire Highways requesting them to inform the council how they are responding to the impact wild boar are having on our environment and tourism.

Voting was as follows:

For (38) – Marrilyn Smart, Roger Yeates, Venk Shenoi, Carole Allaway Martin, Jane Horne, Frankie Evans, David Easton, Grace Bensted, Len Lawton, Peter Ede, Alastair Fraser, James Bevan, Keith Aburrow, Gabriella Kirkpatrick, Philip Burford, Nikki Goodlad, Des Saunders, Dave East, Andrew Gardiner, Mike Meredith-Edwards, Heather Dalziel, Sue Henchley, Roy Birch, Paul Hiett, David Thomson, Bruce Hogan, Lynn Sterry, Max Coborn, Graham Morgan, Di Martin, Terry Hale, Denis Riley, Patrick Molyneux, Brian Robinson, Peter Amos, Diana Edwards, Martin Quaile, Richard Long

Against (1) - Arthur Thomas

Abstained (0)