Seòmar agus comataidhean

I believe that I have made the case for including weasels, stoats, polecats and ferrets. I understand what the minister has said about polecats, but there are domesticated polecats that have gone feral, which is why I have included them. I believe that we should have the ability to flush them from below ground and to search for them below ground.

As people will know, weasels often use mole burrows to hide, and using a terrier to move along a mole burrow to flush the weasel is an effective way of controlling it. Stoats, too, will hide in small holes, and it might be beneficial to use a dog to flush them.

I turn to the arguments on mink. It is important to keep mink in the section, because they are a predatory species that cause untold damage to the native fauna of Scotland. They damage important species that need to be protected, so they should be included in the bill.

On the other amendments in the group, I understand Ariane Burgess’s position on using dogs to flush animals from underground, but I do not believe that that is the case. There are times when that is important—for example, dogs are the only way of getting foxes out from stone cairns, and the foxes are subsequently shot.

On Jenni Minto’s comments, as I have stated, I believe that it is important to get rid of mink. You would not want mink on islands such as Orkney or Shetland, which Ariane Burgess represents, because they absolutely decimate ground-nesting birds, so controlling them by any means possible should be encouraged. I accept Ariane Burgess’s point that the mink officers were not encouraging the use of dogs underground, but they provided traps and rafts. They encouraged owners to kill mink.

I declare an interest. I have had a mink officer visit the bit of river that I am responsible for, and they encouraged me to kill mink by every legal method possible. I am sorry, convener: I probably should have said at the beginning that I am a farmer. I have declared that to the committee before. If there are any interests that relate to farming and field sports in my entry in the register of members’ interests, I should have declared them at the outset. I hope that the committee will forgive that oversight and accept my declaration at this stage.

I am not entirely sure what Colin Smyth’s amendment 117 is trying to achieve. Any wild mammal that comes to the surface would immediately be killed by shooting, where that is possible and safe to do.

Finally, if I were allowed to vote, I would support Rachael Hamilton’s amendment 225.

I would like all my amendments to be agreed to, because they are important for the control and management of the environment. I do not support Jenni Minto’s amendment, I do not understand Colin Smyth’s amendment and, sadly, I think that Ariane Burgess’s amendments are wrecking amendments that would remove an important legal form of control for predators in the countryside.

I make the observation that I make about every proposed group, before I say whether I think it is right or wrong. A large number of cross-party groups exist and MSPs are giving a great deal of commitment to them. I always raise the concern that another cross-party group—however worthwhile—will further strain the system. I think that we should be careful. That is my only comment.

I am content. I am never going to vote against a cross-party group application, because I do not think it is for me to choose, but I raised the concern because there are more cross-party groups than there are MSPs. They suck in a huge amount of time. That is just a caution.

A lot of what Liam Kerr said was about built facilities and indoor arenas. When it got colder in winter, there used to be a lot of curling ponds dotted around Scotland, where a lot of young children first learned and got experience on ice. Will the cross-party group look at the extent of curling ponds across Scotland, their availability and whether there is a way of preserving them? At the moment, there seems to be an idea that building over them is the way forward. I wonder whether you have a view on that.

There is an opportunity to protect what I believe is a public asset from being lost, which is happening in many communities, especially across the Highlands. I have saved that thought for you.

I have some questions on the accounts, which form a huge part of your report. They caused me a certain amount of heartache when I was trying to understand them last night, but you will shed some light on them. Page 153 shows that administrative expenses for the latest year were reduced by £16 million, which was an 8 per cent reduction. Briefly, how did you manage that?

Douglas, rather than put you on the spot, I am very happy to take a written answer to that question if you do not have it to hand.

I always like to admit when I am wrong—which does not, I am glad to say, happen very often. However, I am wrong in this case, because I promised some opening statements, which is why Dame Susan Rice looked at me as if I was on a different planet. Susan, I was, indeed, on a different planet this morning. I apologise profusely. I will come back to Fiona Hyslop’s question, if I may.

Are there plans to change that?

Monica Lennon has some questions.