Suffolk Sea Eagles? (1 Viewer)

[david kelly]

"Now was combat near, glory in battle. The time had come when doomed men should fall. Shouts were raised; ravens circled, the eagle eager for food. On earth there was uproar."

The Battle of Maldon.

David

 

[Biancone]

Lack of evidence is NOT evidence of absense. Birds have been studied and recorded to todays standards for a relatively short time. No-one can say for sure when there were eagles in East Anglia and no one can say for sure that there were never any!

What Tideliner wrote is that there is no evidence that sea eagles bred in East Anglia. As far as I know, he's right. He said nothing about evidence of absence. But I wouldn't be at all surprised if they did breed there (a quick Google turned up one interesting ref [www.envarch.net/publications/circaea/10.1/10-1-baxter.pdf] to a skull in Roman Leicester, not too far away, or was it carried from Scotland!). Mention of eagles in mediaeval history is interesting, but are we sure they refer to Haliaeetus? Even if it would be a reintroduction at UK level, and an introduction at East Anglia level (!), I think the plan shows bizarre decision-making. Why not use scarce resources to protect the raptors we already have more effectively?

 

[david kelly]

What Tideliner wrote is that there is no evidence that sea eagles bred in East Anglia. As far as I know, he's right. He said nothing about evidence of absence. But I wouldn't be at all surprised if they did breed there (a quick Google turned up one interesting ref [www.envarch.net/publications/circaea/10.1/10-1-baxter.pdf] to a skull in Roman Leicester, not too far away, or was it carried from Scotland!). Mention of eagles in mediaeval history is interesting, but are we sure they refer to Haliaeetus? Even if it would be a reintroduction at UK level, and an introduction at East Anglia level (!), I think the plan shows bizarre decision-making. Why not use scarce resources to protect the raptors we already have more effectively?

The quote about the battle I posted is about Essex, not too far from Sussex. The eagles involved would almost certainly be White-tailed, not Golden. This battle took place in August 911.

David

 

[PaulD]

It might be worth a look at this website

http://www.gobirding.eu/Photos/WhitetailedEagle.php

It's against the introduction/reintroduction, but does note:-

"a zooarcheologist, and others have apparently found evidence that the species did indeed occur here in Norfolk, probably until the 17th Century. Moreover she tells me that the records of Sir Thomas Browne, writing in the 17th Century, mention the species breeding here."

I believe Thomas Browne corresponded with John Ray who never mentioned WTE, so it would be helpful to have more information and/or an update on this, but I'm not aware of anything.

 

[Biancone]

Well, unless I missed something, which is very possible, Thomas Browne said nothing about breeding. I think this is the only relevant passage (after mentioning lack of Golden Eagle): "Of other sorts of eagles, there are several kinds, especially of the halycetus or fen eagles...". And that's it. Nor does he say anything about how regular, or otherwise, the species was (contrary to Natural England's website). There's a version online at: http://www.archive.org/stream/sirthomasbrownes04brow/sirthomasbrownes04brow_djvu.txt

Browne was in Norfolk from 1637. In 1866 Heney Stevenson said in his Birds of Norfolk: "every autumn or winter affords specimens of this eagle in immature plumage, and it appears also at times late in spring, but in no instance have I known the adult bird to occur in this county." So whatever happened in the 17th century there was no breeding in Norfolk in the 19th.

But the widespread reports of bone material from archaeological sites and the place name evidence strongly suggest the species bred quite widely in wet lowland and coastal parts of the British Isles in Saxon and Roman times. Either that, or there were huge flocks of dispersing and wintering birds!

 

[Jacana]

"Now was combat near, glory in battle. The time had come when doomed men should fall. Shouts were raised; ravens circled, the eagle eager for food. On earth there was uproar."

The Battle of Maldon.

David

The problem with historical sources such as these is that how can we discount poetic license?

 

[Biancone]

Yes, I believe there was a literary device used in some Anglo-Saxon and later English literature for dramatic slaughter to be associated with appearance of the 'Beasts of Battle', ie. wolf, raven and eagle. Strong symbolism associated with these animals, but the association with battle has a plausible basis in fact. Definitely unwise to take these accounts as any kind of primary evidence about the occurrence of sea eagles, but kind of intriguing backup.

 

[Tideliner]

Thanks for that David , this is the first indicator that sea eagles were present in summer . Though not proving breeding a small indicator they were at least present over a 1000 years ago. A start , but as Biancone says , it needs a lot more back up.

You always have to take into account poetic license. On here most of us are reasonable good birdwatchers , but most of the public are not. Time and time again when looking for golden eagles in Scotland’s I have had eagles pointed out to me by non birding locals only to find they were buzzards.

quote "Of other sorts of eagles, there are several kinds, especially of the halycetus or fen eagles...".
Is an illustration of this . What were the several kinds of eagles Thomas Browne was talking about , sea eagles perhaps , did we have short toed , booted , lesser spotted as well or is it more likely that he means buzzards or harriers. In many of his observations he seems a compentent bird watcher , but in the case of eagles he does seem confused.


Quote " Of other sorts of eagles, there are several kinds, especi-
ally of the halycetus or fen eagles ; some of three yards
and a quarter from the extremity of the wings ; 2 whereof one
being taken alive, grew so tame, that it went about the yard
feeding on fish, red herrings, flesh, and any offals, without
the least trouble.


Quote " The great and noble kind of eagle, called aquila Gesneri, 1
I have not seen in this country ; but one I met with in this
country, brought from Ireland, which I kept two years, feed-
ing with whelps, cats, rats, and the like ; in all that while
not giving it any water ; which I afterward presented unto Dr Scarbrough. "

Quote "1 aquila Gesneri..'] Falcochrysatos,the specimens, however, measure more than
golden eagle ; the largest of the genus, seven or eight feet from the extremities
known to breed in the mountainous parts of the wings. "

Clearly the Cromer birds are likely to be sea eagles , but what of aquila Gesneri. From its description of size ( larger than a golden eagle ) I would suggest this is also a sea eagle. Could it be possible he is talking about adult and juvenile sea eagles ? If they are juveniles there is no mention that they were taken from a nest , but perhaps more telling is that if aquila Gesneri is a sea eagle the quote "known to breed in the mountainous" suggests they are not of East Anglian breeding origin as we have no mountains in the region.

I cannot find in Sir Tomas Browne's work the statment "Moreover she tells me that the records of Sir Thomas Browne, writing in the 17th Century, mention the species breeding here." though reading through it is very hard work and some of it is in latin so I could have missed it.

...........................................................................................................................

http://www.gobirding.eu/Photos/WhitetailedEagle.php

Paulid's link sums the argument against the introduction of sea eagles much better than I have though we both think on similar lines. Could any supporter of the project read the very good article and honestly justify the eagles introduction

 

[Original PaulE]

It's interesting that we are looking to the past to justify whether to introduce or not, however with global warming and climate change maybe it would be better to look forward and make a judgement on whether the eagles should be introduced based on the effect they may or may not have in the future.
After all what difference does it make whether eagles were here or not 2000 years ago if the climate and habitats have changed beyond recognition.
I therefore think that the eagles being here or not in the past is irrelevant and shouldn't really be a factor in the decision whether to introduce or not after all if the eagles get here naturally their success or failure will be based on many factors,food supply,breeding opportunities persecution from man however whether they were here 2000,1000 or a 100 years ago will have no effect whatsoever.

cheers

 

[DavidP]

Doesn't it seem a little strange that we're talking about whether an eagle appeared above a battlefield over a thousand years ago when there's breeding evidence from a similar area of lowland marsh, estuary 200 years ago thats only about 150-200 miles away. Surely before widespread persecution we can assume that they were fairly widespread across lowland Britain.

That maybe a separate issue from whether they should be re introduced and there are obviously a few groups who are bitterly opposed and they may have their own reasons based upon perceived threat to livestock, shooting interests.

 

[Adam W]

I would agree that looking into the distant past is pointless because as has been said the landscape has changed beyond recognition so its irrelevant really what happened a long time ago,looking to the impact they would have in the future would make more sense i think.
I would also agree however as a few people have said that perhaps the time and money may be better spent helping the birds or indeed any wildlife we already have and may be in need of help rather than bringing new ones in.

 

[Jos Stratford]

Could any supporter of the project read the very good article and honestly justify the eagles introduction

Yes, because the author doesn't really say anything to raise concerns relating to conservation. It is merely cherry-picked 'facts' to suit the conclusion he has already reached.


To take one example from his article,

"A recent wintering White-tailed Eagle in East Anglia was reported to have caused mayhem among the other wintering birds every time it took to flight. If these birds were present during the breeding season it is not difficult to imagine the threat they could pose to other rare and vulnerable breeding birds."


Could I suggest the author, or any others with concerns, actually travels to see the interaction between these species where they already co-exist.

Sorry, but the sentence quoted above illustrates nothing other than the very simple observation that birds get flushed. White-tailed Eagles do flush birds, that does not equate to 'mayhem' and it certainly does not equate to any threat. On their migration, almost all these birds wintering in East Anglia will co-exist with White-tailed Eagles and it truly stretches my imagination, a word the author likes to use, to see any reason why these same birds could not cope in Britain. Furthermore, all species breeding in East Anglia also breed alongside White-tailed Eagles across the continent, show us the evidence to suggest populations are suffering due to the eagles.



Another sentence...

"I understand from Eddie Chapman that White-tailed Eagles at Finnmark in Norway play havoc with migrating Lesser White-fronted Geese. At a very important migration stop-over site for the geese, the eagles continually scare them onto the wing reducing the time they have to feed and rest."

'Play havoc', whose words? Again, the fact that birds are flushed by passing eagles does not equate to a problem - tens of thousands of geese migrate through a delta in the country I reside, a delta that at the same time also attracts White-tailed Eagles in numbers over 50. Frequent interaction between the species, the geese numbers are not showing any indication of decline.

In conclusion, the paper simply states opinion, suggesting the eagles shouldn't be reintroduced because they will flush birds. Well, big deal, so they flush birds. Geese, Bitterns, Cranes, Corncrakes, etc, etc, have naturally occurred alongside White-tailed Eagle for eons, so they will continue to do so.

The only true reason to oppose the restoration of the species in the UK is the island mentality of the people residing there, not the species of bird residing.

 

[Jos Stratford]

I would also agree however as a few people have said that perhaps the time and money may be better spent helping the birds or indeed any wildlife we already have .

Whilst I believe there are no environmental concerns to hold us back in reintroducing the eagles to the UK, I would concur this might be a valid reason to hold back.

However, I don't worry too much about money issues either. In my experience, and I do not know financial details of the specific case, funding is rarely a direct choice between this project and that, but rather each frequently generates cash in itself. If the White-tailed Eagle project truly would divert cash from 'more pressing' needs, then so be it, maybe not the best idea.

 

[jurek]

The only true reason to oppose the restoration of the species in the UK is the island mentality of the people

:-O Very true.

English usually imagine wildlife to be like Beatrix Potter characters in the landscape from Teletubbies. Real animals have no right to exist.

 

[Tideliner]

Jos to say " The only true reason to oppose the restoration of the species in the UK is the island mentality of the people " is rubbish and you know it.

I for one wholeheartedly supported the reintroduction of red kites into the UK and sea eagles to west Scotland . The evidence was there for all to see that they were past natives. Likewise I took part in breeding white headed ducks for reintroduction projects in Spain back in the 70s and 80s.

I have nothing against reintroduction projects if " in situ " conservation is unlikely to work , but the world is littered with wildlife introduction cases that have damaged native wildlife ( I list some below if you have your doubts over the damage that has been done ) and see no merits in the sea eagle project to boost numbers of an already thriving European species.


A few examples of the damage done by introduced species.


Hybrid with native species
Mallard with Grey duck. Only 5% of the true native grey duck stock are left.
Mallard with American black duck
Ruddy duck with White headed duck in Spain
Canada geese crossing with native geese species.

Predating native species
Barn owls in the Bahamas have nearly caused the extinction of fairy terns on the islands.

Damaging crops
Redpolls in New Zeland cause serious dammage to fruit crops
Canada geese damaging crops
Linnet damaging grain crops in New Zealand

Spreading disease
House sparrows in Brazil carry sleeping sickness
Starlings carry avian TB , avian malaria , meningitis and fowl pest
Pathogens carried by naturalized birds ( Japanese white eye and others ) in Hawaiian islands have caused serious declines and some extinction’s in native honeycreepers.

Out competing native species
Pheasant and prairie chicken
Mina bird ousting native species from nest sites
Starling in America and South Africa

The point is we never know the unseen risks of introducing a new breeding species to an area. After all who would have suspected redpolls causing serious damage to fruit buds , house sparrows carrying sleeping sickness or barn owls causing the near extinction of Bahama Island fairy terns. In view of the increasing European mainland population of sea eagles is that risk justified.

 

[Jos Stratford]

... the world is littered with wildlife introduction projects that have damaged native wildlife and see no merits in the sea eagle project to boost numbers of an already thriving European species.

We will continue to disagree, I live amongst White-tailed Eagles and am simply countering many of the arguments being forwarded as they simply do not equate to the reality, for example the comments on Cranes, the 'medlam' they create, etc.

While I agree there can be doubts on a financial angle, I simply do not agree, and have seen no evidence forwarding to suggest it, that there is a threat to species already resident in East Anglia.

Interestingly, you have already said, if the species happens to recolonise naturally, you would welcome it - presumably all the worries about imminent disasters are now not worries?

 

[VillagerFred]

Personally would prefer the resources to be directed at saving the albatross populations on crown protectorates such as Gough Island: internationally important populations at a real threat of extinction in the next few decades.
With 1 in 60 of the UK population a member of the RSPB it really would be embarassing to lose such birds on 'our turf'.
Can't say I am particuarly taken with the 'say no to sea eagles' signs though, noticed them when I went to minismere end of January

 

[Jos Stratford]

A few examples of the damage done by introduced species.


Hybrid with native species
Mallard with Grey duck. Only 5% of the true native grey duck stock are left.
Mallard with American black duck
Ruddy duck with White headed duck in Spain
Canada geese crossing with native geese species.

Predating native species
Barn owls in the Bahamas have nearly caused the extinction of fairy terns on the islands.

Damaging crops
Redpolls in New Zeland cause serious dammage to fruit crops
Canada geese damaging crops
Linnet damaging grain crops in New Zealand

Spreading disease
House sparrows in Brazil carry sleeping sickness
Starlings carry avian TB , avian malaria , meningitis and fowl pest
Pathogens carried by naturalized birds ( Japanese white eye and others ) in Hawaiian islands have caused serious declines and some extinction’s in native honeycreepers.

Out competing native species
Pheasant and prairie chicken
Mina bird ousting native species from nest sites
Starling in America and South Africa

The point is we never know the unseen risks of introducing a new breeding species to an area. After all who would have suspected redpolls causing serious damage to fruit buds , house sparrows carrying sleeping sickness or barn owls causing the near extinction of Bahama Island fairy terns. In view of the increasing European mainland population of sea eagles is that risk justified.

Sorry, but not one of your examples even closely approximates to the situation with White-tailed Eagle. All your examples relate to a species being introduced into another continent totally and interacting with species it formally didn't have contact with. White-tailed Eagle already breeds alongside all species in East Anglia, White-tailed Eagle already breeds in the same North Sea ecosystem and White-tailed Eagle is a native species to the UK, not a case with any of the examples you quote.

 

[Dave Appleton]

Yes, because the author doesn't really say anything to raise concerns relating to conservation. It is merely cherry-picked 'facts' to suit the conclusion he has already reached.

To take one example from his article,

"A recent wintering White-tailed Eagle in East Anglia was reported to have caused mayhem among the other wintering birds every time it took to flight. If these birds were present during the breeding season it is not difficult to imagine the threat they could pose to other rare and vulnerable breeding birds."

...Another sentence...

"I understand from Eddie Chapman that White-tailed Eagles at Finnmark in Norway play havoc with migrating Lesser White-fronted Geese. At a very important migration stop-over site for the geese, the eagles continually scare them onto the wing reducing the time they have to feed and rest."

...the paper simply states opinion, suggesting the eagles shouldn't be reintroduced because they will flush birds.

Jos, this really is quite disingenuous! You have quoted two consecutive sentences that make up less than 2% of my article. Sure, they contain opinions, but it is quite misleading of you to state that I don't say anything to raise concerns relating to conservation or that I am simply suggesting eagles shouldn't be reintroduced because they will flush birds.

Indeed the context of the one paragraph you cherry-picked appears to have eluded you. My preceding sentence reads: "Even if the chances are low, any incidents that are reported, whether they are real or erroneously claimed, are likely to have a significant negative impact in terms of public relations. That could be disastrous in such a sensitive and important region."

My argument is very much about concerns relating to conservation. Whilst you overstate the balance of opinion versus facts in my article make no mistake that opinion is a critical ingredient of any conservation initiative. I am deeply concerned that the RSPB and Natural England's failure to take honest stock of the opinions of this project's stakeholders (including local birders, landowners and members of the public) will not only impact this project's success but will bring their reputation and that of conservation in general into disrepute. The consequence of that will be far greater than the presence or absence of a few Eagles in East Anglia. And all this for what? For a species that is not even a conservation priority!

As for diverting cash away from other conservation priorities, I really can't see how it can't. But even if I'm somehow wrong about that, I know of at least one member who was about to write out a cheque to the RSPB for a 4-figure sum when they were invited to upgrade to Life membership, and changed their mind purely because of this issue, and I don't suppose they were alone. That may be a drop in the ocean compared to the £82 million they spent on conservation in the year 2008/09 but that money will go a lot further if they maintain the support of their stakeholders and you don't have to talk to many local birders, landowners and members of the public to realise that this initiative isn't helping them do that.

 

[Tideliner]

Jos , I do wonder how much you understand the ecological impacts that can occur when a new species enters a ecosystem whether it is found in similar ecosystems or not. At the very least native species take time to a just to new species entering their habitat. Because cranes and other local species you refer to do not have negative responses in your local area does not mean the same species will react in the same manner in a situation where they have not met the introduced species.

Not all the examples I gave are from birds that have never met each before. In the case of gene swamping mallard and black duck main areas have adjoined each other and some sharing of wintering habitat. But shooting interests started to introduce mallard into the core black duck areas with dire effects.

The present UK goshawk population stems primarily from falconers released birds and though not a threat to sparrowhawks on a national level they do kill sparrowhawks and can cause major local reductions in populations. The same can be said to the increasing English stocks of Roe deer. A mixture of natural spread and relocation by man is resulting in over browsing of our native shrub layer trees with serious knock on effects to many of our breeding woodland birds.

But the main reason for the examples I quoted in the last post is to illustrate their can be unforeseen effects when introducing new species or species that have been absent for long periods of time into an ecosystem. The type of Baltic ecosystem you are talking about differ from East Anglian in some ways . The most important are the extensive size of Baltic wetlands where the effects of a predator are diluted to a degree and the biomass of wildlife is so much greater within your wetlands and thus better able to withstand a major predator at the top of the food chain.

As far as I can see the main benefits to the introduction of sea eagles to east Anglia are those with a financial interest in their revenue drawing potential and indeed wildlife tourism features high on the reasons for their introduction. They would be great for wildlife guides i guess.