There’s been an outpouring of frustration mixed with anger on social media, and in my head, over the fifth disappearance of a male Hen Harrier from the English uplands this year. Yesterday I was quite distracted whilst doing a BBS visit – I had to keep telling myself to concentrate and count the Carrion Crows! I noticed that some people, some people whom I’m sure are very much on the same ‘side’ as I am, were having a go at Springwatch and having a go at the RSPB. I don’t think that’s a good idea – I’d wait for a while and see what happens before leaping to criticise. I think we might see some activity over the next week or so.
And in any case, I am sure that the RSPB (which isn’t a single ‘thing’), is just as frustrated and angry as many of us. The staff of the Skydancer project, and the investigations team, and many others whom I know and could name, are absolutely bound to be feeling sick with anger and frustration at the loss of Hen Harriers in the English uplands.
But it isn’t the RSPB shooting or trapping them, is it? They aren’t the problem and we should concentrate on solving the problem rather than squabbling with our closest allies – surely?
The enemies of the Hen Harrier are making some huge mistakes. Every ‘disappeared’ Hen Harrier raises the public profile of grouse shooting and its ills. If I were the ‘British grouse industry’ (the funders of YFTB remember) then I wouldn’t want the type of publicity that it has got over the last few weeks.
Will M&S be keener to be associated with the British grouse industry when the British grouse industry funds a campaign against a charity with more than a million members? M&S aren’t daft, you know. Last year our campaigning persuaded M&S to reverse their decision to sell grouse meat in two London stores in a high profile volte face. Will the events of the last few weeks reassure M&S that they should re-reverse their decision? It would be madness for such a miniscule amount of profit to risk such a lot of reputation. The good guys in the British grouse industry (whoever they are – they are as difficult to name as the bad guys) must be cursing YFTB and whoever helped five male Hen Harriers to ‘disappear’ in such a public manner.
What about Defra? Liz Truss is the almost invisible Defra Secretary of State. Will she want to be seen to be cosying up in public to the British grouse industry when hardly a week goes by without a protected Hen Harrier disappearing from the English uplands? When there appears to be an illegal and blatant adult-meddling scheme in place, who would touch a brood-meddling scheme? That would be very brave Minister! Even the Hawk and Owl Trust has gone quiet – strangely quiet – on this matter. Is brood-meddling still their preferred way forward to cosy up to grouse moor managers? Really? Really? You must be kidding!
Have you noticed how BASC, GWCT and the Moorland Association have gone a bit quiet too? Surely they have something to say about these disappearing harriers? We haven’t even seen the usual crocodile tears. What do shooting organisations think about the low life expectancy of English Hen Harriers? I suspect that some in these organisations are livid that YFTB (funded by the British grouse industry) are taking such a crude anti-RSPB line. Doesn’t demonstrate any class at all does it?
YFTB don’t have to tell us who funds them. But is the Duke of Westminster, owner of the Abbeystead grouse moor in the Forest of Bowland, one of them? I kind of doubt it, but he and every other grouse moor owner, a bunch of Dukes amongst them, has been swept up in that phrase ‘the British grouse industry’. Maybe His Grace is, maybe he isn’t. I can’t tell you. Only he or YFTB can tell you. Where do grouse moor managers and owners really stand? Or do they stand? Maybe they creep about amongst the shadows. If there are lots of ‘good’ grouse moors in England, and it is quite a big ‘if’ – then now, right now, is the time for them to stand up and be counted. Will the Moorland Association repudiate the YFTB campaign? Will BASC? I doubt that GWCT under the spinning Andrew Gilruth will, but let’s see.
Does ‘the British grouse industry’ mean everyone in the British grouse industry (seems unlikely), many of them, some of them, or just a few misguided extremists? You must make up your own mind, unless people start to distance themselves from this group.
The events of the last month have brought closer the demise of driven grouse shooting in the UK. How ironic!
What next? Wait and see, for a while. We don’t have to rush. We will win.
But it would help if the RSPB Council managed to notice that there is no point at all in continuing to talk to the British grouse industry and that they should start talking to their natural supporters rather more. We RSPB members can make the RSPB change its policy to a harder line – but we’d rather you did it yourselves.
[registration_form]
Hello Mark
I was one of the people frustrated initially that raptor persecution wasn’t highlighted on Springwatch and hold my hands up to making tweets to that effect, which I now regret. I should have waited patiently and when it was raised on Unsprung it was done so rationally by Chris Packham. Nobody should fault that, and I’m grateful to everyone at Springwatch for highlighting such a difficult subject.
As a member and huge fan of the RSPB, some of my happiest days with my children have been on their reserves, the only aspect of their policies I disagree with is their stance on your petition. Should the RSPB not apprise all members of the persecution of hen harriers, and let the decision to sign your second petition rest with them, not everyone is on twitter and many members may not be aware. – That is of course if the Government facilitates the petition site again.
Because of how upset/angry I am at the concentrated effort to eradicate hen harriers from England I can only imagine how the RSPB Skydancer team and all involved closer to the campaign feel. At the end of the day we all want to see the same outcome, the protection of these magnificent raptors in England, relinquishing membership of the RSPB will not support that.
I look forward to hen harrier day, especially as I wasn’t at the first one.
Sam Farrell
Sam – thank you for that and I look forward to seeing you on Hen Harrier Day (of which, more soon).
Yep, I think you’re right. The RSPB does so much good that we must all support it, and I certainly do and will. But the RSPB Council needs to think about which side it’s on – it’s not difficult is it when YFTB (funded by the British grouse industry) keeps attacking it on matters that are, quite clearly, nothing at all to do with grouse shooting? The time for talking is over; there has been talking for decades (and I was part of that conversation) in order to look for some sort of compromise, but none has emerged. That’s because there isn’t a compromise to be found with the criminal element of the grouse shooting industry. Let’s consign grouse shooting to history! Would we miss it? not at all.
Mark, I wholeheartedly agree that the time for talking is past, the plight of hen harriers is certainly not improving, and the fact that yours is still a voice of reason after all this time speaks volumes to me. I wasn’t implying by the way that you were advocating giving up on the RSPB, just I was aware from my twitter feed that some members may be. I still believe that as last August the RSPB, via twitter, asked its members to support the thunderclapit for hen harrier day, then they should too have urged the same for the petition to ban dgs, the two are linked.
So yes I agree the RSPB council should support a ban of driven grouse shooting, and disillusioned members will aid hen harriers far more by supporting that request, rather than relinquishing membership.
That is spot on. You try to be fair. You don’t try to defend the indefendable. The real fly in the ointment is the Tories, now that they’re not shackled to the Liberals.
Perhaps it’s time someone questions the charity status of the GWCT?
All the these nests have one thing in common, continual observation and human disturbance. Theres plenty of hen harriers in Scotland which are not under constant supervision and do well. Maybe it’s time to look closer to home for the problem of deserted nests. Anyone would think the RSPB have a vested interest in low harrier numbers in Northern England, why else would they not join the ranks with DEFRA to bolster their numbers through brood management and diversionary feeding? Your idealist vision of banning grouse shooting will be even worse for the Hen Harriers e.g Langhoolm grouse moor …..”That conflict was illustrated on a driven grouse moor at Langholm between 1992 and 1997. Hen harrier numbers rose from two to 20 pairs in six years before shooting was then abandoned because the hen harriers ate over a third of all grouse chicks that hatched. With no grouse shooting, the local culture, economy and employment suffered and the control of generalist predators ceased. By 2003, the 20 harrier nests were back down to two and numbers of breeding grouse and waders had more than halved. Predation was identified as the most likely cause of the declines for grouse, waders and harriers. Grouse moor managers felt their worst fears had just been proven – this was a real lose/lose situation.
Stop pointing the finger in the wrong direction and tell the RSPB to get it’s out of it’s arse.
Jon – welcome back. How about you answer the questions that others and I posed to you a few days ago before going off on another rant?
Btw – you mean ‘its arse’ rather than ‘it’s arse’ – but your point remains perfectly clear despite that, as does your rudeness.
Btw – you mean the disappearance of a fifth male Hen Harrier.
filbert – http://nargaque.com/2010/04/28/saying-what-you-mean-and-meaning-what-you-say/
Jon, you say “There’s plenty of hen harriers in Scotland which are not under constant supervision and do well.” Is that true? The potential national hen harrier population in Scotland is estimated to be within the range 1467-1790 pairs. The latest population estimate for Scotland is only 505 pairs, a 20% decline from the 2004 national survey. Favourable conservation status is being achieved in only five out of 20 regions in Scotland. So Scotland’s actually missing a lot more hen harriers than the rest of the UK.
Ah, the old “hen harriers can’t get by without gamekeepers to look after them” argument! And yet the areas where hen harriers are missing from apparently suitable habitat are the keepered grouse moors and the areas where they seem to be doing reasonably well don’t have grouse shooting. Hen harriers get on pretty well in various parts of the world that are not subject to keepering; its only where grouse shooting occurs in the UK that seems to be especially dangerous for them.
Jonathan – maybe we should count the times this fallacious argument has been used here. Maybe not!
you should do ‘false argument bingo’, like buzzword bingo. We’d win lots.
Jon, you quote the GWCT’s interpretation of the Joint Raptor Study done at Langholm. This was an interesting study and if you go to the actual source (http://www.gwct.org.uk/media/249268/Hen_harriers_and_the_Joint_Raptor_Study_2005.pdf) rather than just reading the GWCT’s editing highlights, you will see implicit recognition that raptor persecution is the only thing keeping red grouse shooting viable on many shooting estates when the report’s authors state: “if illegal persecution ceased… raptor predation could make driven grouse shooting uneconomic on more than half of all Scottish and English moors”. Note, “if” it ceased. It is also noteworthy that Langholm had no hen harriers at all for extended periods prior to the complete protection the study afforded it, but that once this protection was afforded there were for a while twenty pairs of these birds on the moor. In other words do not insult us by insinuating that raptor workers monitoring nests are responsible for disappeared hen harriers – it makes you look obtuse and ill informed.
Incidentally the JRS you cite is also why I am ultimately in favour of a ban on driven grouse shooting – because it demonstrates the industry is fundamentally incompatible with the existence of one of our native predators. The only argument in favour of choosing this industry over the hen harrier is that it provides income for those involved in it, but then so did tiger hunting, and for that matter so does human trafficking, but just because you can make money doing something doesn’t make it defensible.
You seem to have conveniently forgotten that all of these nests also have in common the close proximity of grouse moors which have an historical tradition of persecuting raptors, a clear motive to do so and the staff with the skills, plus the opportunity, to do the dirty deed. That’s not to say we have incontrovertible proof as to where the guilt lies, but we do have very good grounds for suspicion. Your ‘case’ against the RSPB, in contrast, is feeble (i’m being polite). You seem to conflate “continual observation” and “human disturbance” together which is odd since the first, professionally done, usually prevents the second. You also fail to take into consideration the RSPB’s remarkable record for managing such situations to the birds’ favour (e.g. return of the Osprey & the recent nesting of Bee-eaters in the IoW). Further, if disturbance near the nest were really a significant factor then the birds would have been far more likely to desert before, not after, eggs had hatched. Not only that but the males seem to have vanished away from the closely observed (and, according to your thesis, more ‘disturbed’) nest site; just when males are more likely to visit surrounding moorland without the control of sympathetic landowners and not under such close observation. The snide and ill informed suggestion that the RSPB has a vested interest in low harrier numbers in England is not merely without foundation but insulting not only to that organisation, but also the many volunteers who would have played a part in protecting Hen Harriers. You don’t have to look far for a perfectly rational and reasonable reason why the RSPB does not support brood management; it does nothing to address the real problem. Frankly, apologists for those who persecute this superb bird – and make no mistake this is the reality of your position – are as bad as those who pull the trigger or set the bait.
Your responses are laughable, rather than take the time to put forward a reasoned response you correct grammar. I’ll assume you must agree with my previous statement.
Jon – you assume whatever you like, and laugh as much as you like. How about answering some of those questions?
OK. Jon please explain this, on grouse moors 60-70% of harriers disappear during breeding, usually but not always this is the hunting male away from the nest. In other habitats this figure is only 1-2% and that is mainly down to eagle predation. There is only one eagle in England and he is not prone to visit a range of grouse moors. Monitoring of nests does not involve disturbance quite the reverse.
Also going back to failure by disappearance, in this area (grouse moors) it used to be that nests failed by contents or female disappearance. Then the nests were watched most if not all the time and hey presto they failed due to hunting male disappearance or pairs disappeared before they had nests with contents. This is sadly quite predictable even on UU land in Bowland where hunting males do not respect estate boundaries and seem to have disappeared whilst on neighbouring grouse estates ( also true of Geltsdale).
Grouse estates and their managers/keepers seem to be quite incapable in far too many cases of obeying the law( there can be no excuse for doing otherwise). This is as true for Peregrines ( successful nests are almost entirely absent from English grouse moors) as it is for Hen Harriers.
There is in fact only one logical conclusion— persecution but of course apologists such as yourself will deny that. Most Pennine grouse moors from North Yorkshire to the Scottish border are SSSIs and part of the North Pennine SPA, designated for Hen Harrier, Peregrine and Golden Plover, it is a national disgrace that only the plovers are there in appropriate numbers.
We will not go away until this situation is permanently corrected and neither you nor loud-mouthed, ignorant ex cricketers will do ought but spur us on.
I’m not in total agreement with what appears to be being said here. I want a way forward however, that sees some hope of ending this slaughter. I will look at how we got here, though, before looking at what we can do.
Why are we here? Concerned people have had a deteriorating influence in government departments. The RSPB has a huge following, who have not been even kept well informed. The fact that the RSPB does not oppose shooting (and quite right) does not mean it has had to simply talk with the government and the grouse shooting industry about the criminality highlighted by the past chair of N.E. The RSPB has has been sniped at ever since it raised it’s head slightly above the parapet and suggested licensing of grouse moors, after years of being sniped at by many members for it’s lack of meaningful action. This has repeatedly been pointed out over several years as a policy designed to fail. I have and will always support the RSPB, but do not agree that it has taken the right approach. This approach has meant less Hen Harriers, and that is the real problem. I regret to say that the RSPB has forgotten the birds, but I don’t want to look at the past; we need a way forward.
What is the present position? My summary is this. The grouse shooting industry has pointed out that we will have less Hen Harriers if the RSPB does not accept brood management. They have illustrated that well this year by the following procedure; use gas guns to deter Hen Harriers as soon as a male is seen displaying, shoot the males when they forage on a grouse moor, repeat that we would have more Hen Harriers is brood management was accepted, put into the media that the RSPB does not want more HH or it would accept the proposals of the grouse shooting industry, and remind people that there are capable organisations and scientists only too willing to take on the task. Funnily enough, there always are, aren’t there, people who would sell their reputation for a mess of pottage?
What can we do? The government will not help. I only see one solution. We need to catch the people who are doing this in the act. They are already careful, but we can do it. It is not enough to be vigilant but not vigilante; we are not in the hills enough with our long lenses. If the RSPB and other existing organisations puts more lawful effort, utilise (and if necessary adapt) technology and recruit more volunteers into assisting with the matter, the criminals can be caught and exposed. While England refuses to implement vicarious liability, we may not get the full effect, but we may be able to stop the rot. Let us look at one possibility. If the foraging areas had been identified, and simple continuous battery powered recording cameras been situated at intervals with only a small protrusion above the heather we may have seen what happened to one HH. The moor owner would probably find some and be furious, but he could not be sure he had removed them all, and might change his mind at that stage. That would be a good result, similar to brood removal. Would it be illegal to plant these? Probably not. England may have less nests next year, so covering them all would be comparatively cheap and the money could be raised. I’d probably like a more hi-tech solution, with remote control, remotely switching on to prevent wireless detection (think Springwatch without the cables to the controllable cameras, and some monitored remote control astronomical telescopes), but this could be combined with the more simple method.
The grouse industry has put the frighteners on the RSPB. Let’s put the frighteners lawfully on them, by this and other means.
I fear that technology may not be able to provide an answer quite as easily as you suggest. A foraging hen harrier can cover an awful lot of ground in a landscape that is full of slopes and ridges behind which it can disappear. To provide realistic coverage of even a fraction of this area at a scale in which it is possible to make out what is happening would require an extremely large number of cameras, I would think. If such an attempt was made to fill the moors with cameras I’d imagine that criminally intent persons would sabotage, steal or remove a large number of them so the effort and expense would probably produce no results anyway.
Of course, the RSPB, police and others should continue to make strenuous efforts to catch and prosecute perpetrators of wildlife crime but, frustratingly, we have to accept that it will always be a very difficult ask to catch anyone red-handed.
Probably a simplistic suggestion, but what about diversionary (or in this case supplimentary) feeding? Obviously not to reduce grouse chick predation so that someone can shoot a grouse for fun rather than a natural predator nosh it, but to reduce distance harriers fly for food and thereby susceptibility to shooting, trapping and poisoning on neighbouring non reserve land. Complimenting nest monitoring and could help reduce scope for persecution – worth a try?
I fully understand about the territory covered by a HH. BUT Alex does have a point. If a camera say a faulty one was deliberately “easy” to be find the culprit will wonder if they’re under surveillance which works too a degree as a deterrent
Alex – protection of HH nests in England is already at what is probably an all time high and the response from the criminals has simply been to persecute males while they are hunting away from the nest. The ONLY way to stop this is to take these criminals off the moors by banning driven grouse shooting. Otherwise the opportunity and motivation to take pot shots at or discreetly poison wandering birds remains. Even highly monitored roosts have been targeted by hunters – see marsh harrier roost persecution in Malta http://www.wildlifeextra.com/go/news/malta-flights.html#cr. We need to abandon this British instinct for appeasement and conciliation and instead embrace our finer traditions of banning indefensible but profitable industries such as slavery, tiger hunts and now driven grouse shooting.
I’ve been thinking for a while that technology is the answer to policing the uplands, but was limited to a rather simplistic idea of flying drones over the moors in the hope of catching somebody in the act. However after having a quick google and seeing this website;
http://na.unep.net/geas/getUNEPPageWithArticleIDScript.php?article_id=113
maybe something more sophisticated could be done?
If the male harriers were GPS tagged then a network of acoustic traps could correlate shotgun noises to the time and place of harrier disappearance. Or maybe a microkopter could be programmed to fly after the male harrier during hunts and video it!
I think a problem here is that the issues of grouse moor management and raptor persecution just don’t impact on the passengers on the Clapham omnibus. But they might if the general public were aware of the individual cost to them of cleaning up potable water and repairing flash flood damage. There might be more traction in widening the debate to include externalities that affect everyone – rather than just the two sides currently engaged in this unedifying whingefest.
I recall that Aphonse Capone was imprisoned for tax evasion and not the violent crimes he committed. No matter, look, he went to prison anyway
filbert – someone should write a book about all this stuff so that more people could learn about it. Oh hang on! Someone has and it will be out on the penultimate day of July.
Well done for raising even bigger issue re environmental effects of grouse moors. Even if, an extremely big if in my humble opinion, an accomodation could be reached with grouse moors allowing healthy populations of everything that can live there (which maybe limited number of species to be honest) – including hen harriers, mountain hares etc, then what about the bigger social considerations of increased water treatment charges and flood risk? Can an organisation like the RSPB ethically come to an agreement with the grouse shooting fraternity without dealing with these issues, surely it has Corporate Social Responsibility too. The UK can have, in fact needs extensive natural or semi natural eco systems it’s vast areas given over to deer and grouse shooting that we can’t afford environmentally, economically or socially. Fingers crossed a motion on campaigning against sporting estates called ‘Beavers Not Muirburn!’ will be presented at the AGM of the Scottish Green Party in October. In very short term keep pressure on grouse moors, but we really need to emphasise how ludicrous they are, they just have to go that’s it – or is acceptable for any of us to expect the public to pay more for clean water or risk their homes/businesses being flooded as long as hen harriers are OK?
Excellent blog Mark. I was saddened to see so much criticism and negativity towards the RSPB over the weekend as the news emerged about further Hen Harrier losses.
As you say, there will be many amongst the RSPB staff and volunteers who will be just as angered, if not more so, than those criticising it over the last few days. The RSPB isn’t perfect, it can’t please all the people all the time. There are many of us who would like the RSPB to be even stronger on the Hen Harrier, but I am sure they are continually re-evaluating their position, and who knows maybe it will change. If you are a member and you want the RSPB to change it’s stance, then try and do it in a dignified way. Write a letter to Martin Harper, Mike Clarke and Steve Ormerod.
See Martin Harper’s latest blog post for a dignified and professional response under continual fire, most of which is undeserved https://www.rspb.org.uk/community/ourwork/b/martinharper/archive/2015/06/08/more-bad-news-from-bowland.aspx
As Mark and many others point out, it is highly likely we will win this battle against the minority who wish to deprive the masses of our natural heritage, but it will take a few more years. We will achieve that victory if we stand together. YFTB and the ‘grouse industry’ are probably aware of that, hence they seek to divide us.
Rob – well said!
Be in no doubt, violent and inaccurate criticism means it’s hurting ! The HH deaths seem to have rather done for brood management – no broods left to manage – and left the advocates and, sadly, people who, whilst one might not agree with their proposals, were at least looking for a compromise rather high and dry. What I’ve been wondering looking at the butts, the NE CROW exclusion map etc is who actually owns the moors, the butts and the grouse in question ? and exactly what has been going on to reduce England’s much depleted HH to nothing ? That there has been a new, more aggressive and commercial approach to moorland management has come up in the past. Is that the reason for the present situation and if so who is behind it – I am sure there are proud individuals all too ready to tout their achievements in the right quarters – so who are they and what have they got to say about where they have got this issue to ?
Will Jon and his pals apologise when, and it will happen, the evidence is irrefutable that the grouse industry us responsible for the illegal persecution of raptors (don’t forget the Peregrines, Buzzards, Red Kites too) in England and also Scotland. FIFA got found out!!
I agree Mark that RSPB is our best chance of doing good for Birds and Bird habitat that we’ve got but I also share frustration that I don’t see Mike or the senior team kicking down any media doors like we might see from other NGOs who are angry about how this planet’s natural fauna and flora is being treated.
I have no doubt that Mike Clarke is a fantastic chap and I wish I could say that we had met and exchanged views but we haven’t. In fact, I often wonder why Mike seems reluctant to engage in any sort of dialogue whatsoever in my opinion.
We should ask ourselves the difficult questions, including how many people would know the leader of the RSPB if they saw him in the media?
Now I dearly, desperately want the RSPB to succeed but I expect more (am I expecting too much?) and in the age of the referendum, what would membership say if asked the RSPB to lose the leg-irons that prevent them coming our and standing firm on issues of illegality rather having to play a collaborative role with the source of the illegal habits of a few corners or our establishment.
The time in my opinion has come for direct action and coordination of that direct action as demonstrated by other organisations otherwise I fear we are just watching and commentating on something inevitable and saddening to the core rather than making feelings known on the battlegrounds in the uplands.
I want the RSPB to lead this battle and rally some of their many troops.
So am I asking too much?
Some here have spoken about deterrents. How about the Spanish approach?
https://raptorpersecutionscotland.wordpress.com/2015/06/09/now-thats-a-deterrent/
what about using mini-drones to have 24/7 watch on hen harriers while they’re foraging, like 24/7 nest watches? video could catch any persecutors in the act maybe – should at least put the frighteners on them