Postcards for the Queen

IMG_2578

20,132 postcards for the Queen!

Paul, me, Hilary Photo: Felicity Millward/LUSH
Paul, me, Hilary Photo: Felicity/LUSH

This morning, Paul and Hilary from LUSH, and myself (since Chris Packham is out of the country) delivered a couple of boxes of postcards (the rest will follow later) to the Queen. Well, no, not directly to HM The Queen but to her house. And no, not to the front door, wherever that is, but by the side entrance.

Photo: Felicity Millward/LUSH
Photo: Felicity/LUSH

After a long period of negotiation with the Palace the actual handover took less time than I believe it took me to shave this morning! Our identities were checked – I’m glad my Cambridge University Library reader’s card passed muster – and then we were escorted, by a nice Police Inspector, into the building where a man in livery, with braid, took our boxes of cards.  I can’t say he looked thrilled, but there you go! And then we were escorted back to the real world of the busy London pavement.

Photo: Felicity Millward/LUSH
Photo: Felicity/LUSH

We were told that Her Majesty might get to see a postcard or two, but she would certainly see mention of them on a list of correspondence received. I have a feeling that they may not get a mention in the Queen’s Christmas Message to the nation – but, we’ll see. Maybe Her Majesty will bring up the subject of Hen Harriers with David Cameron the next time he pops around for a chat.

The importance of this handover was that the views of more than 20,000 people from the High Streets and Shopping Centres of the UK have been delivered to the Head of State and the centre of the Establishment.

I think LUSH did a fantastic job in their shops, in just a week last August, to enthuse people to speak out for nature.  Those shoppers for bath bombs often came into the shops never having heard of a Hen Harrier and went out feeling angry that these birds are killed illegally by grouse shooting interests.

As we stood on the pavement outside Buckingham Palace I wondered how many of the people passing by would know of Hen Harriers – not very many, I guess. Many were tourists and the Americans would know of the bird as the Northern Harrier (but they would be more likely never to have heard of it), the Scandinavians might know the bird quite well if they were interested in birds and Russians, Chinese and Koreans all stood a chance of knowing the Hen Harrier from their countries. But none would know much about driven grouse shooting, that peculiarly British pastime.

One would be much more likely to find some grouse shooters inside Buckingham Palace than outside I would guess. I do hope that Earl Peel, Lord Chamberlain of the Royal Household, former owner of Gunnerside grouse moor and Vice-President of the Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust gets a chance to flick through the postcards signed by LUSH customers.

This e-petition to ban driven grouse shooting is open to anyone, titled or untitled, rich or poor, LUSH customer or unwashed, to sign provided they are a British citizen – please sign here.

PS the nearest LUSH store to Buckingham Palace appears to be Victoria Station – just five minutes away.

 

The less glamorous side entrance
The less glamorous side entrance

 

 

 

 

 

[registration_form]

31 Replies to “Postcards for the Queen”

  1. Congratulations Mark. I hope you were a suitably deferential subject of her Majesty’s, when entering her household.

    I wonder whether reading one of the postcards might lead to the Queen having a conversation with her grandson Harry about the mysterious disappearing (shot) Hen Harriers of Sandringham?

  2. Earl Peel now owns the Grinton Estate a few miles down dale from Gunnerside (& I’m sat in bed looking at it!)

  3. My word Mark, you do scrub up well! Did you bring an extra box of chocolates (or perhaps a bath bomb) in that gift wrapped box?

  4. I hope that Her Majesty will want to read some of the cards Mark, I’m sure I would if my list of correspondence, had I got such a thing

  5. I wrote to our monarch in November 2007 following a certain “incident” in North West Norfolk. Part of my letter said….

    “The Hen Harrier is a splendid bird that is sadly persecuted in England through much ignorance and folly. As a fully protected species, the bird’s survival requires the full support of responsible people to bring medieval attitudes and activities to an end. If you have never witnessed personally such splendor, I would highly recommend taking time to seek out and admire the spectacle should the opportunity arise.”

    My response was fairly prompt but didn’t mention whether she decided to watch a Hen Harrier but was keen to ensure she mentioned she, unlike myself at the time, was happy with the enquiry carried out by Norfolk Police.

    Thank you for delivering these postcards Mark. Let’s hope that there is a glimmer of chance she and her erstwhile husband and dynasty delight in the pressence of such birds around her estates and those of her neighbours. You must have hope!

  6. First of all:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2fwTndngLAw

    Secondly:

    ‘Stopping management for grouse has been suggested as a means of improving the fortunes of Hen Harriers (Thompson 2009). However, although this would remove the main proximal constraint on populations in some areas, it might not translate straightforwardly into increases in Hen Harrier populations. In areas currently dominated by grouse-moor, a shift to alternative land uses such as forestry or high-density stocking with sheep or deer, could diminish the value of the land for harriers by decreasing food availability or nesting success.’

    So, forgive me, but what is the real agenda here?

  7. First of all:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2fwTndngLAw

    Secondly:

    ‘Stopping management for grouse has been suggested as a means of improving the fortunes of Hen Harriers (Thompson 2009). However, although this would remove the main proximal constraint on populations in some areas, it might not translate straightforwardly into increases in Hen Harrier populations. In areas currently dominated by grouse-moor, a shift to alternative land uses such as forestry or high-density stocking with sheep or deer, could diminish the value of the land for harriers by decreasing food availability or nesting success.’

    http://www.bto.org/national-offices/scotland/our-work/selected-highlights/hen-harrier

    So, forgive me, but what is the real agenda here?

  8. Errrrr…….I am a mere disinterested bystander. Is that the whole point of this blog then – attention?

      1. It’s fairly odd writing just to get attention without any other purpose; narcissism.

        But you are, of course, just being coy, so let me help everyone else out here, for perspective.

        LUSH funds you and LUSH is a supporter of direct action animal rights including sea shepherd (‘Judean Peoples Front’ to Greenpeace’s ‘Peoples Front of Judea’)

        1. Monro – you don’t post (written) comments here to get attention?

          LUSH does not fund me, nor have they ever funded me, nor has anyone closely connected with LUSH, nor have I applied to LUSH for funding. This isn’t the type of statement that can be an error made in good faith so you owe me an apology for posting lies on my blog (and, depending how they feel about it, to LUSH too). You won’t post comments here again until you do apologise.

          I do actually publish a list of my sources of income each calendar year on another page on this site. Here is the link https://markavery.info/about/

          1. Whilst anonymity is acceptable and appreciated you’d still expect folk to have done their research if they are going to make allegations?

            All they do is to succeed in demonstrating (or should it be evidencing) poor ‘political’ practice?

          2. Mark Avery has unreservedly given me his word that he has never received any support financially or in any other form, expenses, administrative support, motor mileage, train fares, telephone bills, subsistence or anything else, from LUSH.

            I am consequently obliged to withdraw my accusation and apologise for making it in the first place, which I am delighted so to do.

          3. An honest mistake on my part.

            This article I reference suggests that the whole hen harrier petition was funded by LUSH, the RSPB and the North West raptor protection group:

            ‘An epetition passes 10,000 signatures, Cosmetics company Lush and its customers ask the Queen for help, and a big protest is to be held on Sunday…….The company said in a press release: “We call upon the Queen to use her power and popularity to help protect these last precious few Hen Harriers in England…….Head of Lush, Mark Constantine OBE, also founded The Sound Approach, the independent birding publishing company…..Lush will be inviting customers into their shops from today, 8 August…..Signatories will have an opportunity to support the online petition asking the government to ban driven grouse shooting, started by Birdwatch contributor Dr Mark Avery and TV naturalist Chris Packham, with support from the RSPB and the North-West Raptor Protection Group…..Lush’s Ethical Director, Hilary Jones, commented: “What a right royal mess we are in with Hen Harriers.’

            http://www.birdwatch.co.uk/channel/newsitem.asp?c=11&cate=__15579

          4. Monro – apology accepted. LUSH supported my e-petition, as have 18,000+ people, but they haven’t supported me financially. If you jump to conclusions on everything as you have done here then we will have an interesting time together on this blog (since I have a feeling you are keen to comment here). Since you haven’t got off to a very good, or very polite, or very friendly start, may I ask you to keep your comments relevant to the post in question, on-topic, polite and non-repetitive. And when I say ‘ask’, it’s a bit more than an ask really.

          5. Monro – blimey, you don’t give up do you? You apologise and then backtrack and insinuate. Not very nice really.

            The NWRPG may be sponsored by LUSH – I don’t actually know, or really care. When they say they are ‘supporting’ my e-petition it means that they are asking people, perhaps their members, to sign it. That’s all. You are free to do the same – ask your mates to sign it – although I guess you won’t.

          6. So many threats in such a short space of time.

            That only gives the impression that you have something to hide.

            I was brought up on Exmoor, once teeming with Grouse, red and black, now all gone.

            That is the fate in store for the rest of our uplands unless someone pays for their conservation.

            That isn’t going to be you, LUSH, the North West raptor protection front or the RSPB.

            Their pockets are not deep enough.

            We know the taxpayer won’t do it. Exmoor is a national park, with grants for habitat improvement on offer. It doesn’t, hasn’t worked.

            So what is your idea for the preservation of upland ground nesting birds, including the hen harrier, no longer present on Exmoor or Dartmoor, scarce now in Wales, declining on the Isle of Man, Northern Ireland, the Republic of Ireland, surviving on Orkney only through the removal of corvids (by the RSPB) and absence of foxes, none of which areas have driven grouse shooting, except one moor in a good year in Wales?

            Hen harriers are barely increasing on Langholm, with heavy keepering paid out of public funds since no grouse shooting and so no income from it since 1990.

            What is your plan?

          7. Monro – I’m afraid the rest of the class can’t be held back by you. Try catching up. Read this lot https://markavery.info/epetition-ban-driven-grouse-shooting/

            And don’t keep making snide remarks about me having things to hide. You appear not to be able to behave well.

            So far, your comments have been unfounded allegations, followed by a forced retraction, followed rapidly by insinuation. You must try to behave.

            And do try to stay on topic. These comments are not here for you to write whatever you want wherever you want whenever you want to – sorry.

          8. A lobby to wipe out upland jobs, upland birdlife, all based on zero evidence of persecution of hen harriers in England, is not very nice either.

            I give quotes and references so that readers here can make up their own minds.

          9. Your references give no evidence of any persecution of hen harriers on grouse moors in England at all, only assertion and hearsay.

            On the other hand, CCTV evidence shows hen harriers being killed by foxes on Skye; over 50 hen harriers killed on Skye 2007-12 with no ‘persecution’ at all recorded.

            https://www.scribd.com/doc/233369217/Hen-Harriers-nest-failures-predation-on-Skye-From-Scottish-Birds-magazine-Feb-14

            CCTV evidence shows an Eagle Owl attacking a hen harrier on its nest in England in 2010. The hen harrier was not seen again and the nest was abandoned.

            http://www.birdguides.com/webzine/article.asp?print=1&a=2139

            That is what we members of the level headed general public call evidence.

            So, over 50 hen harriers killed in Scotland and one hen harrier nest abandoned in England as a result of natural predators, with corroborating CCTV evidence.

            What real evidence do you have of hen harrier persecution in England?

            The real threat to hen harriers in England comes from natural predators but that does not help the real agenda here, the campaign to ban game shooting; inconvenient, it is consequently ignored

            It is certainly not snide to state that your persistent threats give the impression that you have something to hide. It is a simple statement of the obvious. That will be the impression that you give to many people who visit this sight.

          10. Monro – your position is laughable. The National Gamekeepers’ Organsiation, GWCT and the Moorland Association are sitting on a Hen Harrier group with the RSPB talking about how to reduce illegal persecution of Hen Harriers in England to achieve a population recovery but you don’t think there is any evidence. Your position is decades out of date and, as I say, laughable.

          11. Their aim is to identify how to sustainably rebuild hen harrier populations alongside driven grouse shooting.

            That is not your aim. The rspb is the only one of those agencies standing out against the DEFRA hen harrier joint recovery plan.

            You can’t provide any evidence, and neither can the rspb, of hen harrier persecution in England, which is the country designated in your petition, and precious little evidence regarding hen harrier persecution in Scotland either (one in the last ten years on Skye but over 50 harriers killed by foxes 2007-12), none in Eire, Northern Ireland, none on the Isle of Man, but hen harrier populations on the decline in all these places.

            No wonder you are embarrassed.

            This is all nonsense on stilts

          12. Monro – there is little we can teach you about nonsense.

            My aim is to remove an intensive land use; that depends on illegal persecution of protected wildlife and very large amounts of legal killing of wildlife; that is responsible for considerable damage to protected habitats such as blanket bogs; scars the landscape; degrades the carbon stores in upland peat soils; increases water bills through increasing the need for treatment of water; increases flood risk (and therefore insurance costs) – and all for the ‘sport’ of shooting Red Grouse.

        2. Monro – I’m sorry, I just can’t understand the last sentence of your comment. Are you referring to Monty Python’s Life of Brian, and, if so, to what purpose?

  9. Sorry mark but does

    The rest of this email has been deleted because the commenter gave an invalid email address.

Comments are closed.