• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Man fined for disturbing ospreys (1 Viewer)

I do have some sympathy for the man involved but he surely must have noticed the birds or nest from that distance.The words over and zealous come to mind.
 
Ben Nevis said:
Sorry,my sympathy has "withered" a bit after reading this link,where the guilty party had ropes and claims to know lots of Osprey nests.

http://news.scotsman.com/scotland.cfm?id=1662552006

Not to defend his actions, please be wary of the summarised reporting of law judgements in the press as they inevitably lack substantial and important detail.

I cannot defend the man but it does state in the article that he denies possessing ropes and it's clear that the Court's judgement was "recklessly disturbing" thus making it clear that the prosecution clearly had no evidence to lead in respect of the alleged ropes.

As I've said below, I think this is disproportionately harsh on this "offender" given the history of leniency shown to convicted active persecutors of our birds.

In short, what message are you sending to the offenders here? I'd say, not a very threatening one.
 
Not trying to defend this man at all, but can we really believe the BBC news report?

The reporter/writer obviously didn't do any research.
When have you ever seen this;
"He was unaware of the adult ospreys, one with a fish in its mouth, repeatedly circling above him".

Yet again the BBC report something about birds that has a glaring error.

Not to mention the same mistake in the 'Scotsman'. Of course one of them wasn't calling to it's young. The fish would have fallen out!!
:h?:
 
Last edited:
Bird-watcher's tent left ospreys too scared to feed chick

The Scotsman article mentioned:

Bird-watcher's tent left ospreys too scared to feed chick
TIM BUGLER

A BIRD-WATCHER who pitched his tent below an osprey's nest could have caused a conservation catastrophe, a court heard yesterday.

Robert Ashcroft went to a remote spot in the Trossachs to photograph ducks and red kites. But he put up his tent 60ft from the base of a tree used by a pair of the protected species in the middle of a nature reserve. He was discovered standing only 20ft from the nest, apparently unaware the adult ospreys, one with a fish in its mouth, were circling above him, too frightened to land and feed their chick.

Yesterday, Ashcroft became the first person to be successfully prosecuted under new laws introduced in 2004 to make it easier to punish people who disturb wild birds.

Stirling Sheriff Court was told that the nest, near Port of Menteith, Perthshire, was an artificial one, built nine years ago by volunteers from the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, with the aim of attracting a breeding pair of ospreys.

Keri Marshall, prosecuting, said it had first been occupied seven years ago and had been used by a breeding pair every year since.

On 3 July last year, RSPB conservation officers visited the nest to ring any young and immediately noticed the adult pair circling distractedly. Neither bird was calling to the chick, as would normally be the case, and the officers realised something must be wrong.

They then noticed Ashcroft's tent, which was being used as a photographic hide, and ordered him to leave the area.

Miss Marshall said: "Mr Ashcroft's activities could have affected the success of the birds' entire breeding attempt, and could have caused them to abandon the site altogether and build another nest in another area, which might not be suitable due to environmental factors."

The court heard that the birds did eventually settle back into their routine, and successfully raised their chick.

Ashcroft, 43, from Knockhouse, Largs, Ayrshire, admitted recklessly disturbing wild birds on a nest.

Laura Jackson, defending, said he was a respectable married man and the technical manager of a factory employing some 200 people.

She said: "In April 2005, he was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis. His consultant advised that exercise would help retain the strength he had, and, as a result, he chose to rekindle a childhood hobby of birdwatching and photography.

"He had been in the area to watch ducks and red kites, and pitched his one-man fisherman's tent unaware of the presence of the nest."

She went on: "When he was interviewed by the police, they said he had rope and other equipment with a view to removing chicks from the nest. This was always vehemently denied. It is now accepted by the prosecution that this was not the case, and it is also accepted his presence was unintentional."

The sheriff, Elizabeth McFarlane, fined Ashcroft £300.

Dave Dick, the RSPB's senior investigations officer said: "It should be said that the RSPB has been aware of this man's activities before. He boasted he knew, in fact, many osprey nests."

An RSPB spokesman said: "Congratulations should go to the Scottish Executive and parliament for introducing this legislation, which sends a signal to people that Scotland's wildlife is valuable yet vulnerable, and must be protected."
 
Great news to see another successful prosecution.

I don't think anyone could fail to notice to notice 2 adult ospreys repeatedly circling around a nest least of all somebody keen enough to buy a load of expensive camera equipment and set up a mobile hide. The red kite and duck excuse is pathetic. We all know exactly why he was there and its good to see the court take it seriously.

:clap:
 
ikw101 said:
Great news to see another successful prosecution.

I don't think anyone could fail to notice to notice 2 adult ospreys repeatedly circling around a nest least of all somebody keen enough to buy a load of expensive camera equipment and set up a mobile hide. The red kite and duck excuse is pathetic. We all know exactly why he was there and its good to see the court take it seriously.

:clap:
Please enlighten the rest of us as to why he was really there?

mamo
 
Warning! This thread is more than 17 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top