The National Lottery Heritage Fund (NLHF) has awarded grants to a range of conservation, woodland, and heritage projects that include lethal grey squirrel control as part of their approved management plans.

This funding has supported, among other things:

• red-squirrel conservation programmes that involve the killing of grey squirrels
  
  

• woodland restoration projects where “grey squirrel control” is written into funding conditions
  
  

• large-scale landscape and heritage schemes with allocated budgets for trapping and killing grey squirrels
  
  

The NLHF is funded by National Lottery ticket sales. As a result, members of the public contribute indirectly to these projects when purchasing lottery tickets, even though many people associate lottery funding primarily with heritage, arts, and community initiatives.

While information about project management plans is publicly available in grant documentation, the role of lethal grey squirrel control is not always prominent or widely understood by the public.

This funding approach has continued despite petitions and public campaigns calling for greater transparency and for the exploration of non-lethal and humane alternatives to grey squirrel culling.

Freedom of Information requests made by Animal Aid revealed that more than 11,000 animals were lethally culled in the Royal Parks between January 2013 and January 2017. In this context, “culling” refers to deliberate killing carried out as part of park management operations. 

Across Bushy Park, Greenwich Park, Hyde Park, Kensington Gardens, Regent’s Park, Richmond Park and St James’s Park, the Royal Parks, the animals killed during this period included:

• 3,679 grey squirrels
  
  

• 330 foxes
  
  

• 2,657 rabbits
  
  

• 1,734 red and fallow deer
  
  

• 1,221 crows
  
  

• 268 geese
  
  

• 382 magpies
  
  

• 46 jays
  
  

• 1,025 pigeons
  
  

• 298 parakeets
  
  

Lethal wildlife control has formed part of Royal Parks management strategies and has continued in subsequent years, including the ongoing control of grey squirrels and other species. 

In Richmond Park, deer culled as part of annual management operations are processed as venison and made available for commercial sale, including to restaurants — a practice that has been publicly acknowledged by the Royal Parks. 

The Penrith & District Red Squirrel Group (PDRSG) is one of several red squirrel conservation organisations in northern England that undertake lethal control of grey squirrels as part of their conservation strategy.

PDRSG’s work has been supported by a combination of public and charitable funding, including grants from the National Lottery Heritage Fund and earlier EU conservation programmes, which have historically funded grey squirrel eradication initiatives in the UK.

On its website and public materials, PDRSG presents its rangers as conservation workers. In practice, the ranger role includes activities such as:

• setting and monitoring lethal traps for grey squirrels
  
  

• killing trapped grey squirrels using approved methods
  
  

• shooting grey squirrels encountered during control operations
  
  

These activities are lawful and form part of established grey squirrel control programmes.

Killing of Lactating Females and Welfare Consequences

A feature published by The Guardian documented the practical and welfare implications of these operations. The journalist accompanied a ranger while traps were checked and recorded the following exchange after a female squirrel was killed:

“The second was a female. After killing her, Shuttleworth gently squeezed milk from a teat. ‘She’s got young. So the young are now waiting.’”

The article goes on to note the difficulty — and often impossibility — of locating dependent young hidden in dreys:

“Could Shuttleworth locate the squirrel’s drey and put its babies out of their misery? ‘How do you find the drey? If you hit an animal on the road, should you get out, see if it’s lactating and find the nest? It goes on and on.’”

This reporting illustrates a recurring welfare issue in grey squirrel eradication programmes: when lactating females are killed, dependent young are frequently left undiscovered and subsequently die from starvation or dehydration.

Presentation Versus Practice

PDRSG publishes photographs of rangers on its website portraying their work as conservation activity. Critics argue that this presentation does not fully convey the nature of the work involved, which includes routine lethal control operations against grey squirrels.

Animal-Welfare Concerns

While PDRSG states that its objective is the protection of red squirrels, animal-welfare organisations argue that lethal grey squirrel eradication raises serious ethical concerns — particularly where control methods result in the unintended suffering and death of dependent young.

These concerns are not limited to this organisation. They are characteristic of grey squirrel eradication programmes more broadly, where control methods can produce welfare outcomes that are rarely visible to the public.

On its website, Pest UK states:

“Grey squirrels can cause considerable damage to a property. They are considered an alien species and classed as vermin which means we can eliminate them. Poisons are not available for amateur or professional use for grey squirrels. The only options are to shoot or trap them. It’s illegal to release a grey squirrel into the wild if you catch one. All dead squirrels should be deeply buried or incinerated.”

Several elements of this statement are legally inaccurate or misleading.

_____________________________________________________________________

Grey squirrels are not legally classified as “vermin”

Pest UK describes grey squirrels as “classed as vermin”.
This terminology has no basis in UK statute.

Under UK law, grey squirrels are:

• listed as an invasive non-native species under the Invasive Alien Species (Enforcement and Permitting) Order 2019
  
  

• listed under Schedule 9 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981
  
  

They are not defined as “vermin” in any legislation.
“Vermin” is an informal term commonly used in pest-control marketing, not a legal status.

________________________________________________________________________

Release law is more nuanced than Pest UK suggests

Pest UK states that it is illegal to release a grey squirrel into the wild if you catch one.
This statement is oversimplified and misleading.

It is correct that you may not:

• capture a grey squirrel
  
  

• transport it to another location
  
  

• release it elsewhere
  
  

However, freeing an animal from accidental entrapment at the point of capture is not a criminal “release”.

It is lawful to free a grey squirrel in situ when it has been unintentionally confined, including when it is:

• caught in netting
  
  

• trapped in a bird feeder
  
  

• stuck in an attic, shed, or garage
  
  

• entangled in fencing or garden structures
  
  

• trapped indoors accidentally
  
  

Freeing an animal from accidental entrapment does not constitute unlawful release under:

• section 14 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, or
  
  

• the Invasive Alien Species (Enforcement and Permitting) Order 2019.
  
  

Pest UK’s statement omits this important legal distinction.

_____________________________________________________________________

“Eliminate” and “incinerate” language reflects a pest-control framing

Pest UK uses terms such as:

• “eliminate”
  
  

• “incinerate”
  
  

While lawful to use in commercial writing, this language reflects a framing that treats a sentient wild animal as waste material rather than acknowledging welfare considerations or lawful non-lethal options.

Many members of the public and animal-welfare organisations regard this framing as inconsistent with modern expectations around wildlife welfare and ethical management.

________________________________________________________________________

Shooting or trapping are not the only lawful options

Pest UK states that “the only options are to shoot or trap” grey squirrels.
This claim is factually incorrect.

Lawful alternatives include:

• freeing the animal in situ if it has been accidentally trapped
  
  

• using non-lethal exclusion and repairing entry points
  
  

• providing temporary first aid where necessary under the Animal Welfare Act 2006
  
  

• transferring the animal to a licensed veterinary practice or wildlife facility
  
  

• applying for a licence under the IAS Order 2019 (e.g. A01 or A02)
  
  

Shooting and trapping are not the only lawful or ethical possibilities.

_____________________________________________________________________

Summary

Pest UK’s public guidance:

• misstates the legal status of grey squirrels
  
  

• oversimplifies release law
  
  

• presents lethal control as the only lawful option
  
  

• uses language that obscures welfare considerations
  
  

This framing does not accurately reflect UK wildlife law or the full range of lawful, non-lethal alternatives available.

_______________________________________________________________________

Sources

Legislation

• Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (section 14 & Schedule 9)
  
  

• Invasive Alien Species (Enforcement and Permitting) Order 2019
  
  

• Animal Welfare Act 2006
  
  

Guidance and analysis

• DEFRA guidance on invasive species enforcement
  
  

• RSPCA guidance on accidental entrapment
  
  

• Pest UK website: “Grey Squirrel Control” (public webpage)