• 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.

Mass killings of BoPs in Brecon Beacons (1 Viewer)

John Cantelo

Well-known member
Strange things seem afoot in Wales .... over a 12 month period (2012/2013) 7 red kites, 7 buzzards and a raven were killed, and 9 poisoned pheasant baits found all in the same area of Powys and exactly the same MO - one of the worst such incidents ever. Having been 'pushed' the police have now made a statement several years late. But why didn't the police make any public statement earlier? Why wasn't there the now standard appeal for information and/or a warning to dog walkers to be aware of dangerous toxic poisons in the area? Several people have now named the same pheasant shooting estate in the Brecon Beacons and the blog below promises “you’ll not struggle to put two and two together” if and when full details are made public. Intriguing stuff ... .....
see https://raptorpersecutionscotland.w...ss-raptor-poisoning-in-wales-police-cover-up/
and https://raptorpersecutionscotland.w...in-wales-police-respond-but-questions-remain/
 
You’ll note in the above police statement that the location has not been revealed. You’ll also note in the RSPB investigations blog that the location is given as a sporting (pheasant shooting) estate in the Brecon Beacons National Park, although the estate is still not named.

We think we’ve got a pretty good idea why this mass poisoning crime has not previously been made public (we’d call that covering it up). Since we published yesterday’s blog, several people have contacted us privately and each has named the same estate as being at the centre of the investigation. We’re not yet in a position to publish that estate name because we need to verify a few things first. But OH MY GOD. If it does turn out to be this estate, you’ll not struggle to put two and two together.
(From the second article)

I'd not finished your first sentence, John, before alarm bells were ringing. I reckon I could name the estate, too.
 
A blog post by the RSPB investigator involved states that the society "is entirely happy with the response from the Dyfed Powys Police, ...... So no ‘cover up’, just a difficult enquiry and, once again, illustrating the real difficulties of trying to prosecute people for these types of crime". This rather misses the point to my mind. Nobody has claimed that the crime wasn't investigated, just that those involved have been strangely reluctant to give details, make the usual public appeals, name the estate involved or make any statement about the case until pushed. That feels like a cover-up to me! Such appeals may just have uncovered that vital extra evidence. At the very least it would have warned dog walkers to be careful and everyone to be on the look out for any suspicious activities. It would also have added some pressure on the relevant estate to clean up its act and for vicarious liability to be seriously looked at in such cases.
 
Why do you have shooting estates in your national parks in the first place?

The shooting estates antedate the formation of National Parks by decades, often centuries, and so I would surmise that the establishment of the National Parks in many cases depended upon getting the landowners and their customary practices onside. Otherwise, many National Parks would have been blocked permanently.

It's likely that the pragmatic view of those at the head of campaigns for National Parks recognised that if the first proposed NP was defeated because the landowners, for whatever reason, had obtained the establishment's support for doing so, subsequent proposals for National Parks would be much more difficult to achieve because of that precedent.
MJB
 
Warning! This thread is more than 8 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