Ruddy Duck cull continuing (1 Viewer)

Farnboro John · Feb 18, 2012

Pete Mella said:
Yes, as James says. We know that very certainly. I was speaking hypothetically that they could. But it's very unlikely. The fact is we can pick up a breeding population of any species in the world and plonk it down anywhere else. The chance of a viable breeding population of an American species reaching Europe is very very small indeed.

Indeed. For instance, multiple individuals and even small flocks of Buff-breasted Sandpipers, Ring-necked Ducks, American Wigeons and Surf Scoters pitch up in Europe (and particularly the UK) every year, but none have yet managed even a colonial toehold. And those are all American birds recorded here so frequently that none is considered a BB rarity.

John

Cheshire Birder · Feb 18, 2012

Farnboro John said:
Yes it is. However, the position with respect to Category C species is doubtful to say the least.

Can anyone explain how it can be legal to release thousands upon thousands of Pheasants and Red-legged Partridges into the wild each year if they would count as non-native species?

I was assuming that once the Ruddies are gone they will revert to fully non-native for legal purposes. Of course, a Cat A Ruddy Duck would enjoy protection, wouldn't it? (And with the feral birds gone, we might be able to pick one out...)

John

As we know with all, when it comes to the law, not everything is equal.

CB

Cheshire Birder · Feb 18, 2012

Robin Edwards said:
Does anyone know if there have been any cases of individuals prosecuted for inadvertant release of RD in Britain ? DEFRA might know where the 59 or so birds are that they would like to cull but do they know of all of the "captive" birds that are owned by collectors?

It so happens that my next-door neighbour keeps captive RD amongst many other exotics but I think it would be difficult to prove that any of his juvenile birds have jumped their fence to join the Mandarin & RCPochard that become more commonplace in the surrounding area. Do DEFRA not carry out prevetative checks to ensure all captive wildfowl are ringed and traceable to their collections?

I'm not being particularly sentimental but I don't see much interest in premptive activities being taken up as opposed to bringing guns into environments where protectied species might be disturbed.

As an aside, I saw on the BBC one Show programme a week or two back, a wildlife rescue centre somewhere releasing Grey Squirrel after recovering to full health. Why wouldn't this act fall under the same W&CA as an illegal act?

I doubt DEFRA have ever had the resources that would allow them to trace and/or prosecute for the illegal release of animals under the W&CA. Does anyone know how many prosecutions have been made against people releasing animals illegally?

Andrew Rowlands said:
As far as I'm aware, re-releasing Grey Squirrels is illegal.

I agree with that.

CB

Richard Klim · Feb 18, 2012

Cheshire Birder said:
I doubt DEFRA have ever had the resources that would allow them to trace and/or prosecute for the illegal release of animals under the W&CA. Does anyone know how many prosecutions have been made against people releasing animals illegally?

As you suggest, many wildlife laws are impractical to enforce and therefore largely hypothetical.

jurek · Feb 18, 2012

The saddest is that danger to WHD was well known and cull proposed already in late 1990s. It was delayed because of animal rights protests and checking alternatives like finding all the nests, which seemed very unlikely at the first place. During this time animal rights groups knew very well, that ruddy ducks keep breeding, making more problems, more ducks to be culled and higher cost.

Somebody could check how the ruddy duck population grew each year and count how many 100s of ducks bred extra because of the delay of the cull.

It is also sad that people protest against conservation-minded cull of ruddy ducks, but hunters shoot thousands of other ducks for pure pleasure, all the time, and the same people keep quiet. Hunting for sport is somehow commonplace, so not important? Or conservation is less important than pleasure?

John Cantelo · Feb 18, 2012

jurek said:
The saddest is that danger to WHD was well known and cull proposed already in late 1990s. It was delayed because of animal rights protests and checking alternatives like finding all the nests, which seemed very unlikely at the first place. During this time animal rights groups knew very well, that ruddy ducks keep breeding, making more problems, more ducks to be culled and higher cost.

Somebody could check how the ruddy duck population grew each year and count how many 100s of ducks bred extra because of the delay of the cull.

It is also sad that people protest against conservation-minded cull of ruddy ducks, but hunters shoot thousands of other ducks for pure pleasure, all the time, and the same people keep quiet. Hunting for sport is somehow commonplace, so not important? Or conservation is less important than pleasure?

Well put, Jurek.

Bird_Bill · Feb 19, 2012

Had time to think about this thread yesterday as I watched from a distance both hunters and photographers compete for space in pursuit of snow geese vs. trumpeter swans. "Twits put 'em all in the air so no one party won"

Had thoughts of one man, Charles Darwin. The impact he made in turning humanity's eyes inward, and outward. Specifically his labratory, the Galapago's.Perhaps we're aware of threats faced there.Found this link enlightning in not only presenting impact in nature but socially related consequences across spectrum of issues.

http://environment.research.yale.edu/documents/downloads/0-9/105stevenson.pdf

AlfArbuthnot · Feb 19, 2012

Andrew Rowlands said:
As far as I'm aware, re-releasing Grey Squirrels is illegal.

Not any more it isn't. A few years ago, some common introduced species were permitted for re-release, after pressure from wildlife rehabilitation charities. Muntjac too.

It's not illegal to release (or re-release) a non-native species, otherwise Pheasant rearing and shooting wouldn't be viable, or moving Fallow Deer from park to park. It is only illegal to release a species which is not already established, or which is specifically named on schedule 9 (due to its potential for damage).

What that essentially means is that the battle is lost with Grey Squirrel and Muntjac, and we are stuck with them forever. Some people seem to want that for the Ruddy Duck too.

In terms of prevention, there is no requirement to ring or record exotic species with defra or Natural England. Ruddy Ducks are no different from budgies or pet Guinea Pigs in that respect. Anyone can buy and breed Ruddy Ducks in captivity in the same way they can buy white mice and breed them. It is illegal to allow Ruddy Ducks to escape, but it's also illegal to litter. With both offences, the nation does not have the resources to effectively police the crimes. Tracing a Ruddy Duck is no less difficult than tracing a crisp packet back to the litterer.

Andrew Rowlands · Feb 19, 2012

AlfArbuthnot said:
Not any more it isn't. A few years ago, some common introduced species were permitted for re-release, after pressure from wildlife rehabilitation charities. Muntjac too.

The DEFRA site seems to be playing hard to get with the schedule 9 pdf, I can only access a version via Googledocs:https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&...-VKAbH&sig=AHIEtbQ2yvfXXrrbCkrsOm_exnB6TcQ72A
As Muntjac and Grey Squirrel are both listed on the (undated) document, my guess is that specific licenses would need to be issued for the release of any species on the current list.

happigumble · Feb 19, 2012

jurek said:
The saddest is that danger to WHD was well known and cull proposed already in late 1990s. It was delayed because of animal rights protests and checking alternatives like finding all the nests, which seemed very unlikely at the first place. During this time animal rights groups knew very well, that ruddy ducks keep breeding, making more problems, more ducks to be culled and higher cost.

Somebody could check how the ruddy duck population grew each year and count how many 100s of ducks bred extra because of the delay of the cull.

It is also sad that people protest against conservation-minded cull of ruddy ducks, but hunters shoot thousands of other ducks for pure pleasure, all the time, and the same people keep quiet. Hunting for sport is somehow commonplace, so not important? Or conservation is less important than pleasure?

Surely it speaks of our humanity and democracy that, whatever side you happen to agree with, there is always pause and debate before these things happen. There is so rarely the right and wrong way to proceed.

I think that you will find that far from being quiet, there are a lot of voices protesting against the shooting of ducks, pheasants and any other wildlife...just not making enough difference, sadly.

ChrisKten · Feb 19, 2012

My posts in this thread were to try to get an idea of how those in favour of this and other culls thought. The reasons for the certainty that this is the correct course of action (I've also read the DEFRA Q&A document giving their side).

And even using the odd "silly argument", I think I've got a sense of the thinking behind the cull. But a one-sided argument isn't really an argument at all; so I've also read other informed opinions (Tom Gullick, AnimalAid, RSPCA, etc).

Taking into account bias/vested interests etc, I still find the opinion/evidence offered by the anti-cull camp more convincing. Of course, it doesn't matter what any of us think, the cull has happened and will continue. Although I do get the feeling that there's a lot more people not reporting the whereabouts of Ruddy Ducks than will admit to it on a public forum.|=)|

As it's probably relevant to how I think; a reminder that I'm not a "Birder". I've nothing against Hybrid species of Birds. To me, Birds are either interesting, or they're not; although I've not found any that fit into the "not" category yet.

happigumble · Feb 19, 2012

ChrisKten said:
To me, Birds are either interesting, or they're not; although I've not found any that fit into the "not" category yet.

:t:

AlfArbuthnot · Feb 19, 2012

Andrew Rowlands said:
As Muntjac and Grey Squirrel are both listed on the (undated) document, my guess is that specific licenses would need to be issued for the release of any species on the current list.

Yes, they're still on Schedule 9, but NE will grant licences for 450 releases per year.

AlfArbuthnot · Feb 19, 2012

ChrisKten said:
I've nothing against Hybrid species of Birds. To me, Birds are either interesting, or they're not; although I've not found any that fit into the "not" category yet.

But don't you see that your logic, and that of AnimalAid will lead to less interesting bird species to see, because two groups of different birds on either side of the ocean will become two groups of the same bird due to man bringing one to meet the other?

It boils down to a very simple question - do you want to have White-headed Ducks and Ruddy Ducks in the World, or just Ruddy Ducks? Because without shooting the Ruddy Ducks in Europe (leaving many tens of thousands in America) you cannot have both. The science is very clear. Those in AnimalAid etc who say it isn't just don't understand it. The people who do understand the science (BirdLife International, Natural England and many other scientists) say that we have to get rid of the Ruddies in Europe if we want to keep White-headed Ducks.

Notice that all of the people who object to the cull are not ornithologists/scientists, and all of the organisation that back the cull are specialists in ornithology/science.

Would you ask AnimalAid for their opinion on the best way to reduce the economic deficit? No, because they are not economists - I'd ask an economist. By the same token, AnimalAid's opinion on genetic swamping and competition in ducks is worth about the same amount of attention. Which is none. When it comes to those subjects, we have specialists at BirdLife, RSPB, Natural England and British and Spanish universities.

When it comes to the ethics of veal crates or dog cruelty, of course, then AnimalAid and RSPCA have some valid things to say. But we don't hear the RSPB chipping in, do we? Horses for courses.

AlfArbuthnot · Feb 19, 2012

Pete Mella said:
(I've yet to see an argument against Mandarins)

Nest-hole competition with Goldeneye, Tawny Owl, Stock Dove? They already use Tawny Owl boxes, and while Mandarin numbers may currently be low and inconsequential, so were the numbers of Grey Squirrels at one time. Large nest holes are already extremely limited (due to the rarity of fully mature trees), so Mandarins could be an extra pressure on native species - does a lowly native Stock Dove has more right to a tree hole than an introduced Mandarin?

Adam W · Feb 19, 2012

AlfArbuthnot said:
does a lowly native Stock Dove has more right to a tree hole than an introduced Mandarin?

Yes if it ever comes to a situation where Stock Doves start to suffer a decline as a result of Mandarins.

birdboybowley · Feb 19, 2012

But then using your own logic, is not the world population of Mandarin in more danger than Tawny Owl, Goldeneye or Stock Dove? I'm sure I read somewhere that the numbers in Britain are almost equal to the remaining world pop so surely our 'non-native' birds are more important - talking on a global scale

Adam W · Feb 19, 2012

birdboybowley said:
But then using your own logic, is not the world population of Mandarin in more danger than Tawny Owl, Goldeneye or Stock Dove? I'm sure I read somewhere that the numbers in Britain are almost equal to the remaining world pop so surely our 'non-native' birds are more important - talking on a global scale

Good point but the answer to a decline in birds where they are supposed to be isnt really to just create another population in a different part of the world is it?
Wouldnt a better solution be for us to rear captive birds and then release them back where they should be?

happigumble · Feb 19, 2012

AlfArbuthnot said:
Notice that all of the people who object to the cull are not ornithologists/scientists, and all of the organisation that back the cull are specialists in ornithology/science.

But isn't it better that we have groups of people, whatever their specialism, asking questions of the specialists? As the cull has gone ahead then the specialists have clearly been listened too, but a healthy debate and accountability can't be a bad thing.

(It is also my understanding that scientists are involved in Animal Aid's work although I don't know which specialisms)

birdboybowley · Feb 19, 2012

Adam W said:
Good point but the answer to a decline in birds where they are supposed to be isnt really to just create another population in a different part of the world is it?
Wouldnt a better solution be for us to rear captive birds and then release them back where they should be?

In a perfect world then yes, but not if the reason they are declining is habitat destruction, hunting, etc. What would be the point? In that case surely having a healthy population somewhere is better than no population at all.

Ruddy Duck cull continuing (1 Viewer)

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

-------------------------

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Active member

It's true, I quite like Pigeons

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member.....apparently so ;)

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member.....apparently so ;)

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread