Embedded Files
Alternatives to Killing
Alternatives to Killing
Lethal control is not the only option
Instead of relying on mass killing, the UK should prioritise habitat protection, regeneration and intelligent forestry design. The primary cause of red-squirrel decline is loss of habitat quality and continuity, not the presence of grey squirrels.1 Money spent on lethal control would be far better invested in restoring the continuous conifer and mixed-woodland habitats that red squirrels depend on. This would benefit not only wildlife, but human wellbeing and climate resilience.
Red squirrels thrive on islands such as the Isle of Wight, where there is no habitat fragmentation and no grey squirrels. Similar safe habitats could be expanded to other UK islands—without scapegoating grey squirrels or committing to violent, long-term eradication campaigns.
Yet governments have repeatedly chosen lethal control. In Wales, publicly funded grey-squirrel killing has taken place for nearly two decades.2 Official control methods have included shooting (including lactating mothers), trapping followed by clubbing, and drey poking—where dreys containing mothers and dependent kittens are knocked from trees and any escaping animals shot on sight.⁽³⁾ Dependent young unable to escape commonly die from dehydration or starvation. Drey destruction has been identified by wildlife welfare groups as one of the most inhumane forms of culling, because it disproportionately kills juveniles.3
The Welsh Government later declared Anglesey “grey-squirrel free,” using this culling as a conservation “success story”, despite the immense suffering caused. National Lottery funding played a significant role in financing grey-squirrel culls across Wales and England, and continues to be used in projects involving lethal control.4 This has occurred despite numerous public petitions calling for humane alternatives.
Rather than endless killing, the UK should invest in a squirrelpox vaccine, which researchers consider biologically plausible and potentially deployable.5 A vaccine would represent a one-off scientific investment, unlike culls that must be repeated forever, at huge financial and ethical cost.
Red squirrels can also be supported through non-lethal interventions, similar to how the public helps songbirds: providing food during harsh winters, installing nest boxes, and improving woodland structure. These methods boost red-squirrel numbers without harming greys, and without inflicting cruelty.
Culling hundreds of thousands of grey squirrels has failed to deliver long-term improvements for red squirrels.6 It generates unnecessary suffering, creates ecological instability through rapid recolonisation, and diverts funding away from the only measures that truly help reds: habitat protection, habitat restoration, and disease control.
References
1. Habitat loss as primary driver of red-squirrel decline
Flaherty et al. (2012) Impact of forest stand structure on red squirrel habitat use;
Rodríguez & Andrén (1999) Red squirrel distribution in fragmented landscapes;
Bryce et al. (2005) Forestry Commission Information Note;
Lurz et al. (2003) Planning a red squirrel conservation area.
2. Welsh Government grey-squirrel eradication programmes
Welsh Government invasive-species control documentation;
Natural Resources Wales grey-squirrel management plans;
Historical funding via projects such as Red Squirrels United.
3. Inhumane control methods documented by wildlife organisations
RSPCA statements on drey poking;
Animal Aid (2017) History of Grey Squirrels in Britain;
Humane Society International UK reports on trapping & dependent young.
4. National Lottery funding of grey-squirrel control
National Lottery Heritage Fund project database (multiple heritage woodland projects include lethal grey-squirrel control);
Projects 2000–2023 involving “habitat restoration” with lethal trapping budgets.
5. Squirrelpox vaccine research
Shuttleworth et al. (2020) Evolving grey squirrel management techniques in Europe;
Chantrey et al. (2014) PLOS ONE – red-squirrel pox immunity studies;
Research proposals for SQPV vaccination feasibility.
6. Culling ineffective and often counterproductive
Harris, Soulsbury & Iossa (2008) Grey squirrel population management;
Schuchert et al. (2014) Rapid recolonisation after culling;
Gurnell et al. (2004) Indirect competition, not population suppression.
Text has been kindly reproduced, with a few minor alterations, from:
Many organisations tell the public that if a grey squirrel is trapped it must be killed and cannot be released.
This is misleading.
If a grey squirrel is accidentally trapped — for example in a bird feeder, netting, or on private property — the law does not prohibit freeing it and allowing it to leave where it was found.
What the law restricts is the deliberate capture and release of grey squirrels into the wild — not the act of freeing an animal that has become unintentionally trapped.
The RSPCA confirms this distinction in its public guidance:
👉 https://www.rspca.org.uk/adviceandwelfare/wildlife/squirrels/injured
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse