Greetings, loyal minions. Your Maximum Leader was perusing various blogs today and found a startling story over at Outside the Beltway. James Joyner finds that Scotland is toying with licensing sporrans. The original BBC article that Joyner cites states that the license will be required to show that sporrans produced after 1994 out of the hides of “endangered” animals were humanely harvested. Specifically the piece reads:

The laws are designed to protect endangered species like badgers and otters, whose fur used to be favoured by sporran makers.

The legislation applies to animals killed after 1994.

Applicants must prove that the animal was killed lawfully before they will be able to get a licence.

The conservation regulations were designed to close a number of loopholes and bring Scotland into line with other EU members.

They also apply to other vulnerable animals like deer, wildcats, hedgehogs, bats, lynx, moles, seals, whales, dolphins and porpoises.

The regulations require anyone who owns any part of a protected animal to obtain a licence.

The maximum penalties for breaking the law are a fine of £5,000 and six months in prison.

Oy! £5,000 and six months in prison is a bit much for the unlawful taking of an otter or badger. Of course, it isn’t all that bad if you think that a few hundred years ago you could be killed for hunting in the King’s forest… Well… That would be a King’s forest in England, not in Scotland. And they rarely ever did put anyone to death for it… Walter Scott and countless showings of Errol Flynn’s Robin Hood not withstanding.

Frankly this story, like so many many others, is just another sign of what is wrong in Europe. This law is being promulgated to bring Scotland in line with other EU countries. Is there anything good coming out of the EU Congress in Brussels? Your Maximum Leader isn’t sure of any.

By the way… How the hell would you find out that a sporran was pre or post 1994? Your Maximum Leader has a sporran for his kilt. He bought it in 1985. (It is leather - so presumably a license is not required.) But what is to keep a Scot from claiming that the sporran was pre-1994? Why make it retroactive? It seems senseless. If you are going to be “better stewards” of the wee beasties in the forest why not just start your licensing at a specific future date? It makes a heck of a lot more sense.

This makes your Maximum Leader want to run out and get a badger/otter/deer/lynx/wildcat/mole/dolphin/seal/whale/bat sporran… Just to have one.

Carry on.