Whatever you think of him, you’ve got to admit that Chris Packham has guts. Despite being abused on social media, and despite the shooting lobby gunning for his job at the BBC, Chris has today launched a new e-petition calling for a moratorium, not an all-out ban, on shooting Woodcock, Snipe and Golden Plover (did you know that Golden Plover can be shot legally in the UK for fun?).
This is unlikely to make his life easier, and it is unlikely to endear him more deeply to the likes of Tim Bonner and others. But Chris stands up for nature and fights for his beliefs.
Shooting is not properly regulated in the UK – there are no bag limits set and there is no proper monitoring of the numbers killed. This is the type of thing that might be addressed by a licensing scheme as proposed by the RSPB for shooting estates (although grouse shooting is so bad that we should just ban it completely).
I don’t think anyone is suggesting that shooting is the main cause of the declines in these waders’ populations but there are good previous examples of shooting being curtailed voluntarily or by law when species are brought to low numbers by other factors.
I’ve signed Chris’s e-petition and I suggest you should too – here’s the link.
[registration_form]
If you are sharing on twitter then use the hashtags #autumnwatch, #springwatch, #unsprung, and #countryfile to achieve maximum readership. Especially #Countryfile and #Autumnwatch.
Also, yes signed. No let up.
I did the BTO Woodcock survey at three sites this year. I know that they have wintering populations but there was zero evidence of any breeding activity at any of these sites. Tragic.
Signed and shared with pleasure.
Signed..and shared…
Black grouse and grey partridge are also both red-listed, of course, yet remain on the quarry list. Both are subject to some degree of voluntary restraint by shooters and, in neither case, as with woodcock, can shooting be blamed for their decline. Nevertheless, it speaks of successive governments’ complete lack of any objective approach to the fair and proper regulation of hunting that these species remain legal to kill. An earlier Scottish administration – not the SNP – had the bottle to remove capercaillie from the quarry list there, to much squealing and harrumphing from the usual quarters; a move that looks like a complete no-brainer now. (But, in law, you may still shoot caper in England! It would be nice if this was actually possible – but not nice if it actually happened.)
So, do BASC / G[WC]T or Defra (given they license through NE) publish statistics on all shot quarry species? Whilst habitat degradation and incorporation into ever larger areas of agri-intensification is not per se to blame, any more than shooting, there will be some interesting analysis to be had from decline data, intensification and shooting stats.?
Nimby – no they don’t
They cannot do so, since there is no systematic public record of shooting bags. One might even say there was a lack of any objective approach to the fair and proper regulation of hunting. Oh, just realised…..I’ve already said that.
Now there’s a surprise then …. but if ‘we’ do not continually ask these questions then what likelihood of any change in reporting systems?
If wildlife and environment is to stand a chance then continued complacency has to be challenged?
Did Mark ask who the environmental lobby was?
While I agree with a ban on shooting woodcock, a ban on shooting grey partridge wouldn’t help grey partridge numbers as much as a ban on shooting pheasents or red legged partridge. That ban would probably lead to the stopping of the unsustainable practice of releasing hundreds of game birds that out compete the grey partridge.
Where I still struggle is with the fact that reared pheasants are deemed to be livestock, yet when they are released they are wild birds (thus avoiding any chance that a shooting estate might be held responsible by insurance companies for any accidents the birds cause?) if the shoot then recaptures any stock at the end of the season then they become livestock again.
mmmh, other than the bracketed suggestion, why else might this morphing be permitted? Is there a benefit to the environment, is there a benefit to the public, do they provide some eco-system service? Perhaps the woodlands where these ‘wild birds’ live out their short lives attract higher level public subsidies because they are good for conservation of (delete corvids, raptors, foxes, mustelids &c.) etc. etc.?
Easy to ring the reared birds so origins can be established. Checks could establish compliance and failure could attract sanctions?
what you on about, u know feck all about the countryside way of life. go back to your office in the middle of london, and do some more research you waste of oxygen.
mike – thank you for your comment. It speaks volumes.
Thanks Mike
I suspect you may live nearer a London office than I do.
I do hope that the lead shot in your foot doesn’t cause too much indigestion.
You see I’m countryside born and still live in it, so remind me …. what don’t I know?
In my local area it appeared to be hawkers, not just shooters, who put an end to the Grey Partridges. I don’t doubt that other factors were responsible for the decline, including agricultural intensification and greatly increased use of herbicides, but it was hawkers enthusiastically hunting down the last remaining pockets that wiped them out completely. In the latter days their Goshawks and Peregrines were taking almost as many autumn migrant Corncrakes as Grey Partridges, and this was in southwest Scotland, not the Western Isles!
“I don’t think anyone is suggesting that shooting is the main cause of the declines in these waders’ populations but there are good previous examples of shooting being curtailed voluntarily or by law when species are brought to low numbers by other factors.”
That’s interesting because pretty much the same argument applies if you substitute ‘badgers’ for shooting.
Signed.
The crepuscular roding flight of the woodcock. Is there any other territorial behaviour anything like it?
Nothing seen or heard this last season and very little over the last decade. Back in the 1990’s you could guarantee three, even for passes, every spring dawn chorus – regular as clockwork and precisely triggered by the lowest of light intensities. On very rare occasions and, just a few yards apart, two roding birds would fly slowly together. Rivals? A pair? Who knows?
We’re losing stuff. We’re forgetting what we’re losing.
Yes, to moratoria if they help to prevent memorials.
I rather like old sayings and expressions. They carry a great deal of wisdom. The one that springs to mind here is:
“Softly, Softly, Catchee Monkey”
What with the constant tempting of the fates, the falling out with fellow birders and conservationists and now this I can’t help but wonder if you’re all trying to sab your own campaigns!
Which ‘fellow birders and conservationists’ would be against these petitions? The ‘birders’ that shoot birds?
PD: Didn’t I read of serious issues within BASC somewhere also?
http://www.thirdsector.co.uk/shooting-association-totally-dysfunctional-says-former-chair/management/article/1407183
…. I am reminded of the one …. “shooting oneself in the foot”
Nimby, you think “I think we’re strolling toward the finishing line” (MA) is helping the campaign?
You think the past squabbles with RSPB staffers plus Messers Merricks and Cowieson within this blog and elsewhere is not going to be leapt upon by your opponents?
You don’t find it puzzling that nothing is apparently done about the lack of publicity given to the “Grouse Shooting Ban” campaign on any number of ornithologically based websites at a time when calls are constantly made to keep the signatures coming?
Is it enough to be less dysfuntional than BASC?
I have no problem with the body of evidence that has been painstakingly built by Dr Avery and co. over the years, I use it in support elsewhere as Mark will know – he has my emails to my MP, PM and Defra. Hardly the stuff of a BASC supporter!! I do fear for the ultimate outcome however.
btw on another subject, did you watch the BBC Brexit Campaign insights program the other night? Interesting that Alan Duncan thought Boris didn’t want Leave to actually win but to be seen to be the darling of the anti EU movement.
PD – I did contact a large number of bird clubs and wildlife trusts and county recorders and RSPB groups by email, and through social media during the course of the campaign. Some of them, I don’t know how many, passed on those emails to all or some of their friends and supporters. I also write a monthly column in Birdwatch magazine which has promoted this cause and in the October issue (out now or very soon!) there is a tear out letter to send to your MP on this subject.
I have no problem with the support from birders – I would always like more, of course. But being a birdwatcher doesn’t always translate into being a campaigner for birds -and although I would like it to be different, there is no reason why it necessarily should.
Mark, “But being a birdwatcher doesn’t always translate into being a campaigner for birds” – tell me about it!
With hindsight if I’d known that my erstwhile colleagues on the bird atlas had no intention of campaigning to rectify the decline they’d documented I think I’d have spent more time on something rather more productive.
Ok I accept you contacted a large number of clubs etc but it wasn’t visible and why get so tetchy about it? You have a big day on 18th Oct. We’ll all be watching. If lil ole me can wind you up its a bit of a concern.
PD – you mustn’t worry yourself, I’ve given evidence in front of select committees a few times before.
Mark, it’s the debate that follows (the select committee event) that “worries” me! As your response here shows!!
I’m sure they will report discord, all part of strategy and tactics. It will be fun seeing what new excuse they’ll offer for dodgy tags next?
In the interim let’s celebrate the BBC Trust’s decision to exonerate Chris Packham. His principles and passion for the natural environment is to be applauded.
Boris & Brexit, yes I’d heard that (or something along those lines) some time back. Tactics and strategies without a risk assessment in that situation perhaps?
PD, a person of your sagacity should clearly be offering their services to Songbird Survival, especially now that Botham has been hit out of the attack. Your line is so old and discredited that it makes you sound like an apologist for wildlife crime. Maybe you are not but there is ‘wisdom’ also in the expression ‘If it quacks like a duck…’
Alan, I am a lifelong birder and you’ll find my name in a couple of BTO sponsored Bird Atlases (responsible for Distribution and Abundance mapping plus fieldwork).
It was only after becoming involved with such projects – in an attempt to lend what limited skills I have to te cause – that I discovered the true nature of so certain so called conservationists.
In my working life, I found fixing problems at root cause the best approach but then I was dealing with machines!
PD, I well understand that there are different ways to crack a nut, and that the petition to ban driven grouse shooting can be perceived to be at one end of a spectrum. But, on that issue, those at the other end of the spectrum have a case to answer which is that over decades the softly, softly approach has failed. What is your answer?
The same with Chris’s new petition. Why characterise that as ‘trying to sab your own campaigns’?
Alan, well to answer your second question first, It’s the timing !
I am reliably informed that “On Tuesday 18 October at 2.15pm, MPs will hear from Mark Avery, the petition creator, and representatives from the RSPB, the Moorland Association and the Countryside Alliance.”
Pete (below) expresses his concern that you guys appear to want to ban every form of shooting. In other words you’re perceived as extremists and the great British public do not like extremism (on the whole). These are the people who need to be convinced of your case but Mr Packham has undermined it with this latest move. Could he not have waited a month or two?
To answer your first question, I would:
1 Replicate all of the good research already acheived.
2 Tackle one issue at a time (as above)
3 Seek the advice of a professional “leadership” consultant. I can recommend William Montgomery of https://askten.com/. He’d critique the style and substance and point out how the style is letting down the substance.
4 Inwardly digest the views of Owen Jones in his book “The Establishment. And How They Get Away With It”. You need to properly understand your opponent and plan your strategy accordingly. As with 3 above you can be sure they will be doing just that and judging by the line up listed in the Shooting and Conservancy APPG they will be benefiting from some pretty formidable councel.
5 Failing 3 and 4 above review Random22 in the “Where did those 123,075 signatures come from?”.
6 Vote for Jeremy Corbyn in the next General Election. Fantastic result for him today and a superb example of how to conduct oneself when under fire from the establishment!!
PD, You have not answered my first question at all, instead giving advice on which I don’t intend to comment. But to return to the question, in my view the burden of proof (as it were) for the best tactics has moved from those advocating radical action to those who advocate steady as you go: because the latter have failed. Is that why you didn’t answer the question?
On the second question, I just disagree with you.
Alan, others will judge whether or not I answered your question. But to simplify I’d go along with the good doctors approach but cut out the crap and try to create a united front with all supporters of the natural world. I note from the state of nature report that you’re currently failing.
Btw, I just watched Sasha Dench trailing Bewick Swans and how she has engaged hunters who have taken an interest in this species’ plight – this is what I call an inspiration.
PD, I think many of us who are lifelong naturalists would prefer the more reasonable approach to resolving complex and problematical issues.
Given that there has been illegal raptor persecution for more decades than enough, how does that ‘mr nice guy’ approach work in such situations? All these expert ‘conflict resolution’ proponents have failed, or do you think their approach is working?
Yes, I too have my name in national atlases (JNCC CE&H). So yes we all have a part to play across a wide spectrum of this conservation campaign.
Nimb, drawing upon Firm Briefing guidelines – how about answering the questions I posed in response to your false analysis above?
This is an interesting and welcome stance by Chris. It highlights another area of concern in bird conservation on which the RSPB has been silent for years. Presumably because it considers shooting not to be a factor in the decline of these species, though I suspect this is just an assumption which lacks appropriate research data. Certainly, I would guess that most RSPB members would be outraged to witness any of these species being blasted out of the sky and it is well past time that they were removed from the quarry list.
I am thrilled that this issue is being given a public airing. I wrote to the RSPB about it a few years ago asking why they were not condemning the practice given the red- list status of these birds. I received the usual woolly whitewash in return saying their decline was not due to shooting but to other causes. That may or may not be true but it certainly doesn’t help. Shooters I’ve come across don’t seem to show any restraint with these species despite what may be claimed. I find it all quite sickening.
Don’t expect too much support / reasonableness from the shooting community’s representatives (deep sarcasm alert).
BASC et al put up a huge fight to stop the Welsh government legislating for a ban on the shooting of Greenland White-fronted Geese in Wales. There are less than 30 of this red-listed species wintering in Wales now, there has been a voluntary moratorium for a while now, but the representatives of the shooting community could not compromise.
Their approach is to refuse to compromise on anything (think lead shot, intensive pheasant and grouse shooting, etc) in the belief that giving way on one issue will lead to the eventual end of all shooting.
Petition signed – I think it’s pretty appalling that black-tailed godwit are still legally shot in France, and think it’s the same for golden plover (aren’t they one of the species that grouse moors are so good for?!), snipe and woodcock in the UK.
what-ho! Driven golden plover, what sport!
(hic! Sorry, Friday evening, I’ve been at the sherry)
I have not signed the intensive grouse shooting petition even though I am not a fan of driven grouse shooting or intensive pheasent shooting. This is because I cant help feel its the start of a slippery slope that will end with me not being able to shoot the occasional (fortnightly) rabbit or pigeon for the pot.
Commercial scale carnage and degradation of upland moorland, illegal persecution of raptors &c. are the issues not an occasional rabbit or pigeon for the pot.
Much of this could have been sorted if those few rotten apples, junior keepers acting outwith senior management instructions (yeah, scapegoats poor souls) had been taken in hand but no, the established order must not be challenged.
I don’t think they are a few, bad practice is very common in intensive grouse and pheasant shooting. Still cant help feeling this is turning into a campaign against all shooting.
Pete, I don’t think your fear of the slippery slope is warranted. I need to say this carefully but there is a kind of people’s alliance against driven grouse shooting, and some of those who have signed are against shooting full stop. Others are against cruel sports. Others find shooting distasteful, wrong even, but are not about to propose it’s being made illegal. I’m probably in the last group. I don’t like hunting but I do not believe all hunting, all shooting is by definition bad, even if I think pretty much think all hunting and all shooting is morally suspect. As Nimby says the problems of driven grouse shooting are sui generis, far more serious than most people realise, and should be treated as such.
So I think it’s a real shame you did not feel able to sign, I hope you will nevertheless feel able to engage in the next stage, with Parliament. The debate there can, and I hope will, be appropriately nuanced.
Poppycock
I could see Pete’s point and I invite ‘general’ shooters to take the rotten apples / junior keepers (yeah!) in hand.
I’ve commented previously about shooting for the pot vs mega commercial public subsidised slaughter for ‘sport’.
Woodcock was once a common species in the woodland near our village. A local told me that nearby Cox Lane was bowdlerised from Cocks Lane, named after the roding woodcocks. When we undertook the GWCT/BTO breeding woodcock survey in 2013 we found none at all but the woodland vegetation was browsed to above head height by deer.
Lyn – deer browsing and drying out of woodland are two issues.
I used to see/hear roding Woodcock sometimes when I left The Lodge in evenings – but not in my last years there.
Thank goodness there are people like Mark Avery and Chris Packham with the guts to stand up for nature against the hunting industry!
Signed, shared on FB and tweeted!
The largest percentage of Woodcock shot in the British Isles originate from Scandinavia and Russia.Whilst hunters must be responsible for their quarry whatever its origin, these populations do not,at present, appear to be affected by this pressure.
In view of the decline in UK breeding numbers,the GWCT has recommended that shooting does not take place until after the November full moon.This should ensure that many of these migrants have arrived ,and lessen the likelihood of native birds being shot.
Incidentally, one of our most well known Raptor workers is a very keen Woodcock hunter,it might be worthwhile hearing his views on this subject.
Regarding Keith Mortons views on Grey Partridge. It is precisely the fact that a few may be shot,if numbers allow,that encourages their conservation by shooting estates.
This is currently in my opinion the only viable hope for the species in the UK. Although I am sure somebody will be only too willing to tell me otherwise.
Trapit – do many GWCT members take any notice of the GWCT’s advice? Evidence suggests not. Hardly any of their members established conservation margins on GWCT advice (until RSPB helped get them into ELS, of course); persecution of raptors continues (or is this only by non-GWCT members)? GWCT advice is more to be quoted in comments like yours than enacted on the ground. The shooting organisations have no control whatsoever over their members so what they say means nowt.
How many RSPB reserves have an habitat enhancement/ creation schemes explicitly for Grey Partridges Mark ? Compare this to the many estates that have invested a great deal of time and money in attempting (often very successfully) to restore a healthy population of Grey Partridges ? The shooting estates have followed the advice of the GCT, to achieve their success. But I agree that the farming industry has been very poor at taking up/ correctly implementing the ELS options to benefit the partridges. Those farms that have done the job properly I would hazard a guess overwhelmingly have an interest in preserving the Grey Partridge for shooting even if they do not do so now.
Richard – Hope Farm (the RSPB’s) did rather better for Grey Partridges than did Loddington (GWCT’s) – did you know that? And have a look at this blog https://markavery.info/2015/11/05/high-hope/
Welcome to this blog and thank you for your comment.
Yes I did, Loddington just did not work for the Greys, not too sure why myself, maybe something to do wit the soil type. But other GCT schemes have being very successful. I really do hope the RSPB start really plouging the resources into turning around the decline of farmland birds. I am sure the GCT could give them plenty of help and advice ☺
Richard – what was the difference in soil type between Loddington and Hope Farm? Do you know?
They are both on clay soils, lime-rich clay soils, impeded drainage, lime-rich, clay soils.
I really do hope that the GCT (as you call them – you must be old, like me) start ploughing money into saving their logo – the RSPB’s is doing quite well. And the RSPB have ‘saved’ the Corncrake, Stone Curlew and Cirl Bunting so GCT have a bit of catching up to do really. Just tell me – what have the GWCT saved?
‘And the RSPB have ‘saved’ the Corncrake, Stone Curlew and Cirl Bunting’
###
Wasn’t it game keepers on grouse moors who saved the stone curlew?
Signed and Shared
As I wrote in my guest blog on this site a year ago:
Since The Wildlife and Countryside Act came into force thirty-four years ago, some of the bird species that are permitted to be shot in their respective open seasons have declined considerably. Snipe and Woodcock are the best examples of these but one really has to ask whether Golden Plover remain a valid quarry species for shooting too. Maybe they’re considered a delicacy in some far-flung parts of the British Isles, but I failed to find any recipes online. I suspect it is their prestigious swiftness that warranted their inclusion in the first place. A question about the flight speed of Golden Plover (now known to be up to 60mph) during a shooting party in Wexford prompted Sir Hugh Beaver (then chairman of the brewery) to found the Guinness Book of Records in 1955.
What study suggests the decline and who conducted it . I would lreally like to view the documents. Our are the facts pulled form the sky . I am a active shooting and conservationist.
Keith – thank you for your comment. Not such an active conservationist that you have read the words on the petition otherwise you would know where the data come from. Do you want to go away and have another look? Welcome to this blog.
I don’t think you will find shooting the problem the fact is modern farming methods are leaving the countryside a barran sterile place for any creature to live and sustain itself in with all the chemical pesticides and the lack of border edges being left for wild plants. Also lack of natural habitat due to expanding numbers of development from humans. Where I used to live in my parents hose years ago we looked out on open fields as we were on the edge of a town now they’ve encroached so much with the housing that they might as well be in the middle of the town . so until we get the balance of the human populations needs right then how can we hope to get breeding bird populations right ? As a first world country that doesn’t seem to care about the countryside because were being run and centralised by the government who think that england stops inside the M25 we won’t get anywhere! This country needs to change its preceptive stop immigration and increasing numbers of people living here. Think of the wildlife we have got and what they need is prey and also think of the habitat they require they also need to stop farmers from turning the countryside barran and re wild areas of ground for wildlife as well as stop killing the pollinators with bug spray to increase yields of crops that way nature will balance itself out again. The only way this will happen is by depopulating this country. So face facts and leave the shooting industry alone as the people involved in shooting are actually great conservationists in their own right by taking out the weak and conserving good bloodlines
Seems to me that any Woodcocks that can make it across the North Sea are in pretty good shape. Or perhaps shooters have some hidden talent for discerning the health of a flying bird, before they blow it away?
One of the big problems for Woodcock is the removal of bracken paid for by HLS. They love to breed, winter feed and roost in it. All my nests found were in it.
Very interesting comment. Bracken seems to get vilified an awful lot and the estates like to say they are keeping it in check as with the dreaded SCRUB! I believe where bracken is there can be quite good ground flora, funny how heather monoculture on other hand is seen as wonderful.
At the end of the day, as David Attenborough, so succinctly put it – there are too many people in the UK and on this planet – pure and simple. Until we get a handle on population control by whatever means then the natural world will continue to suffer.
Barry – welcome to this blog. Please don’t shoot yourself.
Population is a problem because of how and what we consume. If we change our behaviour we can do much better. We don’t need to cut the world population in order to have a moratorium on shooting declining Woodcock.
Thank you for your comment.
No.
There are too few people in the countryside today.
It, and its biodiversity, used to be alive and thriving with us.
I think examining this issue is wise – as it has been examined recently for GP and curlew in Ireland. The problem is where the social media is taking this – and I am disappointed by Mark’s deliberate contribution to this via his comment here about shooting golden plovers for fun. What kind of campaign are you after Mark – an examination of the population dynamics or a trial by populism? It is so hypocritical, do you buy a cooked breakfast for fun, cheap sausage and all – do farmers send off their livestock to the abattoir for fun? Foraging, in all its forms, can be enjoyable. Unlike with industrial scale shooting, hunting wildfowl on coasts is more a type of foraging.
Golden plovers, if hunted, are only hunted by wildfowlers. We are talking a small bag here. I have hunted wildfowl for 18 years, I have shot 7, each few several years apart. They taste, btw, much like teal.
Re data – given points above – it should now be clear we do have data. It has nothing to do with BASC.
T
Tom – very touchy.
One difference between Loddington and Hope farm was the higher numbers of predators at the former site.Possibly due to increased woodland and more varied habitats. A worthwhile improvement in Grey partridge numbers can only be achieved across a broad spectrum of farmland.This is what is currently happening from Hertfordshire to Northumberland,driven by shooting interest.
It takes a bit more than conservation headlands, and a lot more money.
Trapit – yes but the other difference was that GWCT spent money on a gamekeeper to kill predators and it didn’t work, whereas RSPB didn’t and it did work.
I think what you mean is that Grey Partridge numbers have declined nationally, and at Loddington, whereas at Hope Farm they went up (without predator control). Was that what you were getting at? Or was that what you were trying to avoide saying?
As a Norwegian citizen I can not sign the petition, BUT I hope as many as possible Britons all over the globe will sign this! I enjoy the woodcocks flying over my house in Tromsø, Norway and I hope my kids and grandchildren will be able to experience the same! Hunters in East-Europe as well can shoot as many as they like of these fantastic birds, I hope it stops one day before it’s to late!
A big support from the breeding areas of these chaps!
Yours Stein, Tromsø, Norway
Stein – welcome and thank you very much for your comment.
I note the Government’s response to the e-petition states in summary that “It is unlikely that hunting has had a significant impact on recent population trends for woodcock, snipe and golden plover; trends are likely to be influenced more by the quality and extent of habitat…”. Surely this is missing the point? The primary driver of the decline may well lie in the deteriorating quality and quantity of habitat, but that makes it all the more essential that we inhibit other practices which impact on the increasingly fragile populations. It’s no use banding about statistics which tell us very little, especially without comparable statistics of the numbers of these birds needlessly shot for selfish amusement by sick human beings. Locally I’m aware of quite horrendous numbers of wintering Woodcock being shot, and it disturbs me to hear the UK Government dismissing this on the basis that most of them will be foreign migrants. We can’t afford to be parochial, or even worse chauvinistic, about the origins of international populations. Time and again we read accounts by experienced naturalists and ornithologists of the loss of local populations of roding Woodcock, and detailed statistics in local bird reports (a largely ignored source of information) tell of the decline in Golden Plover numbers on the hills. If these species are declining to the extent that experienced birdwatchers notice it acutely, there is obviously something wrong. Personally I have some doubts as to the accuracy of BBS results, because I know for a fact that many amateur ornithologists who adopt ‘random’ BBS survey squares often abandon them when they lose interest or are found to contain little of interest. I have asked the BTO on a number of occasions how they account for this apparent cause of bias, but have yet to receive a satisfactory explanation. This was also a common phenomenon with the former CBC (Common Bird Census), so it could be that both schemes underestimate national changes in bird populations.