The RSPB report on crimes against birds in 2015 has just been published online.
2015 seems like a long time ago but the report is a strong reminder of the scale of wildlife crime against birds that still exists in this country in the twenty-first century. Remember Annie? Stody Estate withdrawal of subsidy? Mutch case? Hen Harrier Day 2015?
Here are some quotes from the report:
‘In 2015, a total of five breeding male hen harriers ‘disappeared’ from nesting sites. It is strongly suspected that most or all of these birds were illegally killed.’
‘A long-term review of individuals convicted of raptor persecution related offences shows a clear link with game rearing interests.’
‘The uplands remain a focus for concerns, where a wealth of evidence links management for driven grouse shooting to wildlife crime. For example, in 2015, only six pairs of hen harriers successfully bred in England, despite huge areas of suitable habitat. In 2016, this figure halved and there were no successful nests on grouse moors.’
‘The RSPB believes the Government needs to do far more to tackle raptor persecution.’
‘Vicarious liability – introduced in Scotland in 2011, this needs to be extended to the rest of the UK so that those ultimately responsible for raptor persecution are made accountable for criminal offences.’
‘…voluntary approaches have failed to deliver necessary compliance with environmental regulations, and the existing situation will not improve without regulatory intervention. Public confidence could be improved by changes to the law to introduce a robust system of licensing capable of governing driven grouse shooting, supported by a statutory code of practice and effective deterrent sanctions, including licence restriction and revocation.’
‘…the standard of statutory enforcement needs to improve, to bring meaningful pressure on those involved and help create a deterrent climate.’
‘Natural England holds a wealth of data from hen harriers tagged since 2007. We have recommended that the Government commissions an independent investigation of these data to help determine where and why tagged hen harriers and other tagged birds of prey are disappearing.’
It might be even clearer if the RSPB said: ‘it is abundantly clear that the Westminster government is soft on wildlife crime, and extremely sympathetic to the perpetrators of wildlife crime. Defra remains inert, inactive and incompetent when it comes to enforcing the laws that protect our wildlife – particularly from criminals associated with game shooting interests. Natural England has not published its Hen Harrier data and was part of the obfuscation around the cause of death of a Hen Harrier which was shot in October 2016. The Defra minister who spoke in the Westminster Hall debate failed to address wildlife crime adequately in her speech and ruled out all the measures that we, the RSPB, are calling for more than three months later. We have no confidence in Defra on this issue. Defra is a large part of the problem and a very small part of the solution. This government is not remotely serious about tackling wildlife crime.’
But that isn’t exactly what the RSPB said so I’ll say it.
And in related news, another Hen Harrier, Carroll (named after the late raptor worker Mick Carroll) has been found dead. Carroll died of a parasitic infection but an X-ray of her body showed that in her short life (she fledged in Northumberland last year) she had collected two shotgun pellets. There’s even an X-ray that shows the pellets.
[registration_form]
“But that isn’t exactly what the RSPB said so I’ll say it.”
Never the less, do I detect a firming of attitude from the RSPB. First time it’s published on line.
Could it be that criticisms from members and certain blogs are starting to pay off?
Will they dare to publish in Natures Home?
“It might be even clearer if the RSPB said: ‘it is abundantly clear that the Westminster government is soft on wildlife crime, and extremely sympathetic to the perpetrators of wildlife crime.”
This is the problem in a nutshell, and Mark encapsulates it perfectly. Driven shooting of both grouse and pheasant is the chosen sport of the upper echelons of the establishment, so it enjoys special corrupt protection. Legally the killing of protected birds is a crime, but the government and the establishment in this instance don’t want the law enforced because it conflicts with the shooting interests of so many members of establishment.
We can only see all this with hindsight. I can remember a TV documentary sometime in the 1970s, about gamekeepers killing protected birds of prey. The sight of raptors dangling from pole traps caused widespread public revulsion. The response of the shooting industry was to claim that this was just a few bad apples, gamekeepers left over from the time when killing raptors was legal. The shooting industry claimed most shooters were appalled at the idea of killing raptors. The shooting organizations all put “conservation” in their names, and we were misled into believing they cared.
This is how the RSPB and other conservation bodies and NGOs got sucked into working with the shooting industry. Because the shooting industry was pretending to want to address the problem, when in reality they wanted to carry on killing raptors.
What changed everything for me was when I discovered that the in secret the grouse shooting industry had been lobbying to be able to kill Hen Harriers legally. I forget the exact circumstances of how I found this out, but it was over 20 years ago. Suddenly it all clicked into place. The shooting industry was being utterly disingenuous when it claimed to be appalled by the killing of raptors. They hadn’t changed at all. This was just a lie, spin and PR for public consumption. It was spin to head off any popular attempt to crack down illegal practise of the shooting industry.
This is why we have a situation where technically raptors are legally protected from persecution, because legally allowing the shooting industry to kill raptors would be publicly unpopular. So the establishment get around this obstacle by paying lip service to protecting raptors, whilst they ensure the law is not enforced. Usually if there’s a prosecution it’s because of the investigation of an NGO like the RSPB who hands the evidence to the police and so the police are forced to act. Rarely or never do the police or any public body start an investigation themselves.
This is the problem in a nutshell, the government and the establishment do not want the enforcement of the law when it comes to the illegal organized crime of raptor persecution by the shooting industry. All this bullcrap about strategies to protect the Hen Harrier and other raptors has all been a diversion. A trap to suck the RSPB and other conservation bodies into, so they waste their time on a futile exercise, whilst the illegal slaughter of these birds carries on in secret on large private shooting estates. This is the dirty little secret the establishment doesn’t want the public to know.
I want one i can download and compare with previous years.
Surely a download would be possible too?
The important parts are in the downloadable appendix but the interactive just makes my eyes and brain hurt. Both should be available.
Superb photos though!
I felt the same but on reflection for journalists and people who are more like the general public than the readers of this blog might be enticed to keep scrolling to see the next items. I still hope that there will be a pdf.
In the Appendices there is a table comparing every year from 2010-2015. However, I’m not sure how useful this is. By it’s very nature most bird crime happens undetected, and thee reports are just the tip of the iceberg. They represent reported incidents, and not the actuality of the problem. An apparent decrease in reported incidents might be taken to indicate a reduction in actual incidents. Whereas this might not be the case as the perpetrators may just have become more careful to avoid detection, or may have changed their methods.
Monitoring and investigation of bird crime is light, and most of the bird crime probably occurs on private land. Therefore detection is down to the effort put in to detect it, and the same effort is not applied everywhere, and likely varies from year to year. In reality active investigation probably only occurs when there are tip offs. When say a dead raptor is found, it is probably due to a mistake or accident by the perpetrators, and you should imagine most of the time they try to destroy or bury the evidence.
Ironically the terms of CRoW Access land do not allow for access for systematic monitoring without permission of the landowner. In other words it is okay for a person generally walking or even birding to report what they see, but if you went there with the specific intention of investigating bird crime, you would be trespassing without permission of the owner of the land.
What should happen is that all managed shoots should be open to unannounced inspection and monitoring as a condition of they being allowed to shoot.
I agree with your points about the interactive presentation, and the high standard of the photographs in it.
The map is very useful. I would just like to see both formats.
From the tables there really does seem to be a drop in poisoning. I know we are only seeing the detected crimes but a year on year drop does seem like it must be real.
If populations don’t recover it just means they are getting more careful and/or changing their killing method.
Let me suggest an alternative hypothesis to explain the apparent drop in detected poisoning cases. The aim of those committing bird crimes is not to get caught, and undoubtedly the majority don’t get caught. When perpetrators get caught through being sloppy and careless, the majority not getting caught learn from this and don’t make the same mistake themselves.
If there was a real drop in the persecution of raptors, especially Hen Harriers, we’d expect to see a sudden recovery in terms of breeding success. Hen Harriers only generally use upland moorland used for grouse shooting as Spring and Summer breeding territories. Hen Harriers will fly long distances looking for prime territories in upland moorland. Plenty of Hen Harriers try to establish breeding territories in English moorland uplands.
The reason for the almost complete failure of breeding attempts by Hen Harriers in England can only be explained by very persistent, widespread and organized persecution. If this persecution was becoming less persistent more Hen Harriers would successfully breed on English upland moorland as they did in the not too distant past. None of this circumstantial evidence suggests any reduction persecution to me.
Have you seen Terry Pickford’s video on YouTube explaining how the other year not a single pair of Hen Harriers or Peregrines successfully nested in the whole of the Forest of Bowland. That he’s been monitoring these birds nesting for 47 years, and this is the first time he ever remembers it. I can remember when there were still nesting Peregrines and Hen Harriers in Bowland just a few years ago. That there are none at all successfully nesting, but Peregrines are nesting successfully around the Forest of Bowland where there is no grouse shooting suggests persistent ongoing persecution. Persecution at a level higher than it has been in the last 50 years or more.
Any let up in this persistent persecution would result in a sudden increase in breeding success. Hen Harriers and other raptors look for prime territories, and if those territories are empty they are drawn in an attempt to nest. These territories only remain empty or devoid of successfully nesting raptors if there is ongoing and very persistent persecution.