Grouse Moors to be licensed in Scotland (1 Viewer)

[jqmhelios]

To conclude, I have determined based on people failing to answer this question that there are no legitimate threats to hen harriers in or around Salisbury Plain and that people just blindly worship the RSPB most of the time and don't even challenge it when they obviously do something wrong. This attitude towards nature- great bustards were wrong, Rutland water was wrong, no place for white storks, unless it never changes, then that is what will not allow the country to recover. What I can see is more and more people will be encouraged to start screaming when something native is reintroduced. Grouse moors will be licensed which will crush the problem, I hope. But unless the attitude towards reintroductions changes Britain will never recover from the point when all forests were wiped out and a lot of native wildlife terminated.
All people spread here is verifiably false conspiracy theories about my identity (Flattering to be discussed, but it is foolish to troll me like that), verifiably false claims about the RSPB's intentions when they in fact contacted SEO who refused to provide hen harriers for the reintroduction, even easier to debunk false claims that eagle owls and white storks are not native based on information from an extremist website.
I expected better.

 

[david kelly]

Evidence for white storks is there, otherwise Nature England would not have reintroduced them. As aside, ti was proven by the World Owt Trust that eagle owls are native as well.
Yes, but what is the specific risk at Salisbury plain? That is where the HH were supposed to be introduced. I doubt there are grouse moors there.

Home

Our aim is to re-establish a wild, breeding population of white storks in the UK. Beloved in Europe, these charismatic birds can thrill and inspire.

www.whitestorkproject.org

There is a ton of evidence for white storks, and it ain't going to go away because some people obviously for some reason hold a grudge against the bird. The link you posted is rather extremist and I completely disagree with it, as does Natural England. Natural England's approval is all that matters to me. Even the RSPB stayed silent.
Whit storks are back, not reintroduced.

If they were there why is such an obvious, conspicuous species not mentioned in historical sources. Place names are not evidence, storks were commoner on the continent in the past so vagrants would have come here.

Why would anyone hold a grudge against the white stork?. Personally, I love seeing them. The link is not extremist, it poses the question if we introduce a bird which is probably non native, then why don't we just introduce anything. In your last post you appear to describe the respected journal British Birds as extremist, from which I take that you call anyone who disagrees with you an extremist. I have read the WOT opinion on whether eagle owls are native or not, and opinion is all it is, not proof.

It doesn't matter if the harriers are safe at their release site, they don't stay there. They wander, end up in northern England on grouse moors and get killed. The people who oppose reintroduction and brood meddling all said this would happen and it did.

Personally. I am in favour of reintroductions if

1. We have solid proof the species was an established native
2. Suitable habitat exists
3. The factors which cause extinction will no longer threaten the reintroduced population
4. There is a suitable source population which will not be endangered by donating individuals to a reintroduction
5. The project is appropriately monitored.

White stork and eagle owl both fail the first test. Hen harrier fails the third.

If illegal persecution ended hen harriers would increase and spread and the reservoir of northern birds would increase allowing habitats in the south to be recolonised. Just dropping birds into the southwest and hoping they'll stay there isn't going to work.

I don't care whether you are Gleb or not, by the way.

David

 

[wolfbirder]

As far as I see it, the key reason the RSPB oppose the brood management is that even if they are reintroduced on the salisbury plain, they wander and will seek out grouse moors in the north once they mature, though they may over-winter at places like Cambridgeshire. Of course, once on the grouse moors, they are largely eradicated.

I have financially supported (only a few hundred pounds but better than nothing) work in the Forest of Bowland in Lancashire, where they are trying to stop the illegal persecution of raptors, including Hen Harriers, Peregrine's, Buzzards. It is where the Eagle Owls (probably originating from escapes) were present, and it is where the beautiful male Pallid Harrier tried to over-summer in 2017 before disappearing in suspect circumstances (though in fairness it may have just moved on).

Either way, the RSPB do not wish to support brood-management because it will still lead to a significant proportion wandering north to grouse moors where they will be killed.

Well thats my interpretation, may be wrong.

 

[WalterRayle]

Just to clear a couple of things up, one satellite tagged Hen Harriers was shot/killed in the Calne area of Wiltshire two or three years back, this is right on the northern edge of Salisbury Plain, so they're not safe in that area (this is also an area where brood-meddled birds were being proposed to be introduced). The bustards were NOT introduced to Salisbury Plain, but to farmland to the east and south of the Plain. Mentioning that they're in Oxfordshire doesn't support any argument about them being self-sustaining, there's a single bird there at the moment that has wandered from the release areas. For the record, there's also been one on the Hants coast for the past couple of winters and that doesn't prove that they're self-sustaining there either.

 

[wolfbirder]

Just to clear a couple of things up, one satellite tagged Hen Harriers was shot/killed in the Calne area of Wiltshire two or three years back, this is right on the northern edge of Salisbury Plain, so they're not safe in that area (this is also an area where brood-meddled birds were being proposed to be introduced). The bustards were NOT introduced to Salisbury Plain, but to farmland to the east and south of the Plain. Mentioning that they're in Oxfordshire doesn't support any argument about them being self-sustaining, there's a single bird there at the moment that has wandered from the release areas. For the record, there's also been one on the Hants coast for the past couple of winters and that doesn't prove that they're self-sustaining there either.

Good post.

The Hen Harrier is clearly at risk, I don't think most people think otherwise. I agree with their stance, because once you legitimise criminal activity by introducing brood management elsewhere, it would simply lead to a total eradication of HHs in their natural areas.

This the RSPB reasoning: -

"Brood management involves removing hen harrier broods from driven grouse moors once breeding numbers begin to impact significantly on numbers of red grouse for shooting. But the RSPB believes the first step in hen harrier recovery should be the cessation of criminal activity. By doing this, harrier numbers would begin to recover naturally and we could then look at other measures. Without that recovery, the hen harrier is at best, destined to be a rare moorland breeder and at worst will be lost from the English uplands altogether.

Fundamentally, and this is where we think NE have got it wrong, brood management is about forcing hen harriers to fit in with driven grouse shooting. That’s starting in entirely the wrong place, driven grouse shooting should instead fit around the recovery of hen harriers. And if it can’t… well, it needs to change.

I also want to point out that brood management is very different to what is known as ‘head starting’, which we support. The two interventions are very different. Head starting involves taking action to assist threatened species (such as black-tailed godwit or spoon-billed sandpiper) and give them, as the name suggests, a “head start” on their road to recovery. Once the population is faring better that active management is removed. For brood management, if it’s successful and there are more hen harriers "to manage" it would involve an ever-increasing level of intervention as density and the perceived conflict with grouse shooting increases.

In summary, while we have significant scientific and philosophical problems with brood management trial, we have taken action today because we have serious concerns about the process undertaken and the legal basis of the trial".


Regards the Great Bustard programme, they do feel that after many years, they are starting to see results as they have changed the way they introduce them. There was an article on Birdwatch magazine last month. Hard to say whether this is self-sustaining yet, or ever will be. But if they are to be believed, it is starting to look promising.

 

[Deb Burhinus]

Good post.

The Hen Harrier is clearly at risk, I don't think most people think otherwise. I agree with their stance, because once you legitimise criminal activity by introducing brood management elsewhere, it would simply lead to a total eradication of HHs in their natural areas.

This the RSPB reasoning: -

I don’t know whether you read the link I posted earlier Nick.

It clearly explains the options being considered by the RSPB and 10 other conservation groups
detailing ‘why killing of birds of prey, illegally or under licence, and setting quotas for birds of prey are not acceptable. It identifies measures that can be taken to reduce the impact of predation on grouse and enhance heather moors for wildlife‘ without brood meddling or setting quotas on the number of HH ‘allowed’ in an area:

http://ww2.rspb.org.uk/Images/redgrouse_tcm9-132996.pdf

 

[opisska]

I have to say that this thread has left my hugely confused. The shooting of the Hen Harriers on the Grouse moors is illegal, right? Those are private enterprises, right? How are they still running then? Do you have no law enforcement in the UK or what? I consider it rather straightforward that if a business breaks a law, it gets fined and if it does repeatedly, it gets closed ...

 

[Nutcracker]

I have to say that this thread has left my hugely confused. The shooting of the Hen Harriers on the Grouse moors is illegal, right? Those are private enterprises, right? How are they still running then? Do you have no law enforcement in the UK or what? I consider it rather straightforward that if a business breaks a law, it gets fined and if it does repeatedly, it gets closed ...

In theory, yes. But the shooting estate owners are currently in government, if not directly personally (tho' several are), then through bribery and behind-the-scenes pressure. A free day's grouse shooting given to the magistrate / chief police officer, if they ensure the case against the keeper is dropped or fails, and so on.

I fully expect the law protecting Hen Harriers to be repealed in the next year or two - our Govt is that corrupt. Their excuse will be that Hen Harrier is not globally red-listed by IUCN, and therefore "doesn't need protection". Also (already promised) trespass is to be criminalised, which will make it a criminal offence to even attempt to investigate wildlife crime on grouse moors; enforcement of the law protecting harriers, already very difficult, will become completely impossible.

 

[jqmhelios]

I have to say that this thread has left my hugely confused. The shooting of the Hen Harriers on the Grouse moors is illegal, right? Those are private enterprises, right? How are they still running then? Do you have no law enforcement in the UK or what? I consider it rather straightforward that if a business breaks a law, it gets fined and if it does repeatedly, it gets closed ...

Seems like it. Well, there is actually law enforcement. Law enforcement brave enough to present accidental eagle disturbers with 400 pound fines, yet chicken enough to largely not investigate most persecution incidents.

The new law about licensing comes into effect very soon and basically means if a bird of prey dissapears on the territory of a grouse moor the management of that moor will face problems and if this occurs repeatedly the place loses the license and is shut down. As you can imagine the shooting industry started screaming but I am delighted that for once the government doesn't care.

I hope it eventually goes further and all shooting estates are closed down.

I also took a look at what Prince Harry did. It is a huge embarassment to law enforcement that not only did they fail to take any action, they also began spreading rumours that such a thing was inconcievable despite there being huge evidence it happened.

This UK needs vicious wildlife police.

 

[opisska]

Yeah, the licensing is definitely the right thing, but I would simply have thought that you don't need a specific measure to say that people can't do illegal things ... it's like it's already included in the things being "illegal" or something. But if they will be made responsible for lost raptors explicitly, that may help indeed. Good to hear.

Also, criminalized trespass, what are you, the 51st state of the US now? In general, every time I see the UK politics lately, it's quite worrying - and I have a special interest in it, because I grew quite fond of the country after a few visits and would like it to stay moreorless sane for future possibilities of doing that again.

As a fun story to lighten up, this reminded me of my first trip to the UK, where I was looking whether there are any birds I don't have in WP to watch and I ended up just going after rarities, because I found no such species (besides the silly Crossbill). Turns out I completely missed the Red Grouse for some reason and I only find that after return. Now I already have them from Norway, but still

 

[Nutcracker]

Also, criminalized trespass, what are you, the 51st state of the US now? In general, every time I see the UK politics lately, it's quite worrying - and I have a special interest in it, because I grew quite fond of the country after a few visits and would like it to stay moreorless sane for future possibilities of doing that again.

Yes, sadly. Except not the 51st state, that would give the protections of US federal law, which is good in some aspects. We'll be more like the US puppet states in Central America, getting all the worst of US corporate power, without the protections the US federal state provides against the worse aspects of it (e.g. US FDA food regulations, which apply to US products sold in US, but not to those exported elsewhere). It is very worrying indeed - I'd emigrate if I could; unfortunately at the moment, I can't.

 

[david kelly]

Just to clarify, licensing is being introduced in Scotland only.

We already have vicarious liability for wildlife crime in Scotland and, as far as I recall, there have been no prosecutions so far but the persecution has continued. Hopefully a robust and well regulated licensing procedure will weed out the criminals and end widespread persecutio.

 

[earthdragon64]

There have only been 2 successful prosecutions under the vicarious liability law since it was brought in. The problem with all types of raptor persecution is the difficulty in finding evidence. These crimes are usually committed in pretty remote areas with very few likely witnesses around.

 

[david kelly]

There have only been 2 successful prosecutions under the vicarious liability law since it was brought in. The problem with all types of raptor persecution is the difficulty in finding evidence. These crimes are usually committed in pretty remote areas with very few likely witnesses around.

Thanks.

David

 

[wolfbirder]

I don’t know whether you read the link I posted earlier Nick.

It clearly explains the options being considered by the RSPB and 10 other conservation groups
detailing ‘why killing of birds of prey, illegally or under licence, and setting quotas for birds of prey are not acceptable. It identifies measures that can be taken to reduce the impact of predation on grouse and enhance heather moors for wildlife‘ without brood meddling or setting quotas on the number of HH ‘allowed’ in an area:

http://ww2.rspb.org.uk/Images/redgrouse_tcm9-132996.pdf

Yes thanks Deb, a more thorough explanation.

Totally agree with it. For me, brood management simply legitimises the removal of HHs on moorland, which IS their natural habitat.

Nothing makes my blood boil more than these criminals getting away with shooting these magnificent birds.

 

[wolfbirder]

There have only been 2 successful prosecutions under the vicarious liability law since it was brought in. The problem with all types of raptor persecution is the difficulty in finding evidence. These crimes are usually committed in pretty remote areas with very few likely witnesses around.

And when they do have CCTV evidence, it still fails on the grounds that it was on private land.

 

[jqmhelios]

And when they do have CCTV evidence, it still fails on the grounds that it was on private land.

Or alternatively if someone has royal blood

 

[Farnboro John]

Or alternatively if someone has royal blood

Not Harry, then....

John

 

[david kelly]

Yeah, the licensing is definitely the right thing, but I would simply have thought that you don't need a specific measure to say that people can't do illegal things ... it's like it's already included in the things being "illegal" or something. But if they will be made responsible for lost raptors explicitly, that may help indeed. Good to hear.

Also, criminalized trespass, what are you, the 51st state of the US now? In general, every time I see the UK politics lately, it's quite worrying - and I have a special interest in it, because I grew quite fond of the country after a few visits and would like it to stay moreorless sane for future possibilities of doing that again.

As a fun story to lighten up, this reminded me of my first trip to the UK, where I was looking whether there are any birds I don't have in WP to watch and I ended up just going after rarities, because I found no such species (besides the silly Crossbill). Turns out I completely missed the Red Grouse for some reason and I only find that after return. Now I already have them from Norway, but still

There is no trespass in Scotland. Scotland has a separate legal system from the rest of the UK. They were converging somewhat due to 300 years of Union but devolution has seen it start to diverge more.

The Scottish Government seems to be trying to appear more wildlife friendly with one hand while living up to their old Tartan Tory reputation with the other (Fergus Ewing cosying up to the Scottish Gamekeepers Association for example).

David

 

[mummymonkey]

There is no trespass in Scotland. Scotland has a separate legal system from the rest of the UK.

Strictly speaking there 3 systems in the UK. England and Wales, Northern Ireland, and Scotland.