• 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.
Where premium quality meets exceptional value. ZEISS Conquest HDX.

Buzzard Persecution Trial to be sponsored by DEFRA (1 Viewer)

Mike Price said:
a U-turn has been announced http://www.nationalgamekeepers.org.uk/news/99/
Click to expand...

Quoted from above (my emphasis in bold) -


The National Gamekeepers’ Organisation (NGO) has expressed disappointment that Defra is not proceeding with its original research proposals into non-lethal solutions to the problem of buzzards attacking young pheasants. Serious damage caused by buzzards is not common but where it does occur, losses to the gamebirds can exceptionally reach 30%.

The NGO believes that the Government’s change of heart, coming just days before the research was due to start, is the result of misinformation about the plans, put about by bird protectionists.

An NGO Spokesman said:

“In law, people with serious problems caused by buzzards can apply for a licence to control them. The deflection of this research means that such applications will just have to be judged without the benefit of independent scientific advice on possible non-lethal alternatives. It is hard to see how that leaves buzzards better off.”



1.The UK buzzard population has increased nearly six-fold in just eleven years, now numbering up to half a million birds.
2.Buzzards are generalist feeders. They sometimes key in on vulnerable young gamebirds, exceptionally causing losses of up to 30% and affecting the viability of important rural businesses.
3.Under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, anyone suffering serious damage to livestock, including fish and pheasants, can apply for a licence to control otherwise protected birds. Non-lethal alternatives must have been tried and found to be ineffective first.
4.Licences for the protection of pheasants have never been approved but equivalent licences are routinely issued to allow fisheries managers to kill cormorants in order to protect their fishing businesses. The UK cormorant population is about one twentieth that of the buzzard.


?? :eek!:

RSPB have issued a press release too - http://www.rspb.org.uk/news/315871-..._source=rss&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=News

From the link on bf here - http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=231594
 
Last edited:
I hope those who cast doubt on what can be achieved vis lobbying and writing to MP's etc are now prepared to reconsider their position. Our much lauded democracy is cumbersome and doesn't always deliver what we prefer personally, but the system can work if people are prepared to invest in it. It may not be perfect, but we've to work at that too.
Let's use it and keep a keen eye on what now follows ( and also turn the heat up on the English Hen Harrier problem!! )
 
AlfArbuthnot said:
In which case voting is taking a punt on your chosen party's ethics, as has always been the case. Of course they "can" introduce something mid-term. There's nothing to say they can't, and everybody is aware that they can. You are perhaps cnfusing your own ethics with someone else's.
Click to expand...

It has nothing to with my ethics although I will agree with your first sentence.
 
Jack Dawe said:
Sorry if someone has already mentioned it and I've missed it, but where did they get the figure of 30% from? Is it trustworthy?
Click to expand...

There is some doubt about what this figure relates to and it is possible that it includes birds scavenged by buzzards yet killed by other factors. As I have pointed out here and elsewhere, it seems strange that estates are reporting losses of this magnitude when an industry release quoted just 3% of all losses were due to raptors. It is equally important to remember that the 3% was a percentage of losses and not of production.
 
Nightranger said:
There is some doubt about what this figure relates to and it is possible that it includes birds scavenged by buzzards yet killed by other factors. As I have pointed out here and elsewhere, it seems strange that estates are reporting losses of this magnitude when an industry release quoted just 3% of all losses were due to raptors. It is equally important to remember that the 3% was a percentage of losses and not of production.
Click to expand...
Thank you. It did rather smack of smoke and mirrors!
 
Jack Dawe said:
Well yes, but they say "it is claimed..." so Defra are only quoting hearsay.
Click to expand...

It does say 'exceptionally' ... but agree, unsubstantiated/we have no proof. If it is a true claim then they must be doing something very different/wrong to most other shooting estates/ have gotten a breed of super-buzzards ... !

Equally concerned by the claim on the NGO press release (so all gamekeepers/Songbird Survivalists will now believe it), that -

1.The UK buzzard population has increased nearly six-fold in just eleven years, now numbering up to half a million birds.

This cannot be true? What are the real figures for this time period?

(And the implication that raptor numbers are increasing at a vast rate and thus need controlling)
 
Last edited:
Whilst some satisfaction can be taken from the withdrawal of the control proposals it's imperative we're aware of the pressure that will now ensue from the Countryside Alliance on DEFRA as far as any future research proposals are concerned. They're entitled to do so , just as much as we are entitled to oppose the idea.
A major aspect is being overlooked. ( see my Blog Buzzards may be doing us a favour perhaps? http://www.birdingodyssey.blogspot.com/
Year after year "surplus Pheasants remain in the countryside after the "season" whose feeding requirements have to be maintained.
Do we know what pressure that puts on our accompanying biodiversity? Do we know what effects their availability has on, by implication, an artificially maintained higher level of Carrion Crows, and foxes? At the moment the debate appears to be surrounding the narrow subject of significant losses incurred ( really ? ) by the shooting fraternity. There is a wider platform of concern that needs addressing and one that I suggest better reflects the position of the wider electorate.
 
I do agree John and I raised earlier in the week on a parallel thread the contradiction that exists between introducing any other non-native species to open mass-release of the common pheasant.
Strict rules would rightly apply to allow any reintroduction based on many things including the impact the species would have to the ecosystem and yet 40million Pheasants are happily released without the full understanding of what this has done and is doing over time to the environment and our native species within.

We see lots of mention of how habitat for Pheasants benefits a host of other wildlife which of course may be true in some ways. In other ways I am sure we would find that it is incredibly detrimental to the predator/prey balance for one.

I also wonder if farmers releasing the birds would be happy to fund the motor Insurance business to some degree to prevent road-users otherwise subsidising their sport?
 
There are two points that concern me with these, now shelved, proposals.

Firstly, i believe this study would have led to little change in numbers being lost to Buzzards. It wss merely a smoke screen for issuing licences to cull buzzards in four years time as 'none lethal methods' to control the buzzards have failed.

Secondly, gamekeepers will continue to use underhand methods to keep Buzzards at bay - i think that it is impossible to monitor these guys effectively. They know their terrain better than anyone. They have first access to birds and know exactly where they breed - as with most predators on their patch. Let's face it it's their job!

As a general point I would like to know why the proposal was shelved. Not because i want to see it again but for the same reason i don't trust the motive for proposing something like this i don't trust the retraction!

I fear that somewhere down the line someone has pointed out that as gamebirds can be counted as 'livestock' that lethal methods of controlling Buzzards can be used therefore bypassing the need for this study.

At the end of the day someone will claim the credit and somewhere down the line there will be some backlash. I sincerely hope not but I don't believe things are that easy.....
 
Hi Rosbifs! On this occasion I believe there was so much public opposition, petitions, E-mails to MP's etc that it was sensible to take account of the reactions of the public and to stage a climbdown. After all, to ignore the opposition means fewer likely votes next time around. One rumour has it that No 10 Downing Street suggested DEFRA wasn't doing the Party cause any good!! What we do need to keep an eye on is what crops up next time!
John.
 
If pheasants are livestock are they subject to all the legislation that applies to keeping chickens? And if they are not livestock but wild animals, how can their constant release be justified given that they are non-native?

Incidentally I heard some years ago from a landowner in North West Scotland that he believed a local decline in Black Grouse was due to greedy shooter landowners causing a reservoir of avian disease by running too many pheasants on the landscape. An interesting take on the subject.

John
 
Farnboro John said:
If pheasants are livestock are they subject to all the legislation that applies to keeping chickens? And if they are not livestock but wild animals, how can their constant release be justified given that they are non-native?

Incidentally I heard some years ago from a landowner in North West Scotland that he believed a local decline in Black Grouse was due to greedy shooter landowners causing a reservoir of avian disease by running too many pheasants on the landscape. An interesting take on the subject.

John
Click to expand...
the livestock issue was quoted as part of the last farming or country act - on here or one of the other DEFRA posts.

loosing black grouse makes sense because of pheasants - think of the food and cover pheasants take up. I'm sure that they push the grouse down the 'pecking' (sorry) order and into marginal areas!
 
rosbifs said:
There are two points that concern me with these, now shelved, proposals.

Firstly, i believe this study would have led to little change in numbers being lost to Buzzards. It wss merely a smoke screen for issuing licences to cull buzzards in four years time as 'none lethal methods' to control the buzzards have failed.

Secondly, gamekeepers will continue to use underhand methods to keep Buzzards at bay - i think that it is impossible to monitor these guys effectively. They know their terrain better than anyone. They have first access to birds and know exactly where they breed - as with most predators on their patch. Let's face it it's their job!

As a general point I would like to know why the proposal was shelved. Not because i want to see it again but for the same reason i don't trust the motive for proposing something like this i don't trust the retraction!

I fear that somewhere down the line someone has pointed out that as gamebirds can be counted as 'livestock' that lethal methods of controlling Buzzards can be used therefore bypassing the need for this study.

At the end of the day someone will claim the credit and somewhere down the line there will be some backlash. I sincerely hope not but I don't believe things are that easy.....
Click to expand...

In my experience of local gamekeepers they hardly know their arse from their elbow, let alone being able to distinguish one raptor from another. One "gamekeeper" of my aquaintance had "not seen a Fieldfare for 15 years" and when I showed him and his shooting partner both Reed Bunting and Yellowhammer they were amazed that such birds existed. Why do we let these people loose in the countryside with guns?

Phil


http://anotherbirdblog.blogspot.com/
 
Warning! This thread is more than 13 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.

Similar threads

A
DEFRA Funded Trial of Buzzard Management
Replies
0
Views
826
Alan Tilmouth
A
angusmcoatup
40 million pheasants!
Replies
6
Views
1K
Farnboro John
Farnboro John

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top