The moorland where we watched Black Grouse display yesterday morning – we saw about 40 birds altogether – also holds Red Grouse. The Black Grouse were displaying and singing but the Red Grouse were behaving like the silent majority in the early morning.
Let’s say there are around 100 Black Grouse at this site (maybe more) but there must be a lot more Red Grouse there but we struggled for a while to see one or hear one. But they are there. Whereas Black grouse lek and draw attention to themselves, Red Grouse form pairs and are territorial but we were surprised we didn’t hear more of them as the light strengthened.
These two species are pretty similar in size and shape but differe drmatically in their behaviour. And although they both occur on this site, and some others too, they differ in their ecology. Red Grouse are pretty much birds of open country and heather moorland whereas Black Grouse are birds of forest edge – sometimes inside the forest, sometimes out on the moorland and sometimes on the boundary.
Generally speaking, what is best for Red Grouse isn’t best for Black Grouse and vice versa. there is no doubt that the etreme management of the British uplands to favour Red Grouse (so that they can be shot for fun) has disadvantaged Black Grouse. It’s not the only thing that has disadvantaged Black Grouse as they have been clobbered by disturbance abd habitat loss too, but the British uplands would be a much more secure refuge for Black Grouse were it not for the extreme management for Red Grouse.
Take a look at other European countries, and their populations of Black Grouse and Red Grouse are strikingly more skewed towards Black Grouse. If they all attempted to introduce driven grouse shooting then their Willow Grouse might increase in numbers but their Black Grouse would suffer. A more natural upland ecosystem, with more forest cover and more scrub would help Black Grouse and still leave plenty of room for plenty of Red Grouse too.
The decline of Black Grouse is certainly not only due to upland management for Red Grouse, after all Black Grouse once strutted their stuff in the New Forest, the Surrey Heaths and in Dorset, but our uplands are far too dominated by intensive management for red Grouse shooting to give Black Grouse enough of a chance.
How much would you pay to experience a Black Grouse lek like the one I saw and heard yesterday morning? well, Alan and Ruth (Ruth and Alan) would be happy to take your money and show you some birds, but there are no business opportunities of a similar sort in the Peak District – and there ought to be. In North Wales a local B&B, a local restaurant, a local cafe and a local petrol station all benefitted from my visit. Their equivalents in the Peak District and many other upland areas in northern England are missing out because of Red Grouse management that imposes a lot of other costs of society too (and us underpinned by wildlife crime).
Things ought to change – and they will.
Spot on Mark. The grouse shooters claim they are good for black grouse they aren’t. The say they create a habitat mosaic, well only a black and white one. Old heather, new heather……and mmm …may be a bit of bog flush. Add in patches of scrub, some fully grown trees and even patches of bracken, beaver dammed streams then we would be heading towards the real deal and god knows how much more wildlife that would benefit from a proper habitat mosaic. Everything from nightjar to juniper to stag beetles could be accomodated by changes ranging from slight slackening of management regime to full blown ecological restoration on grouse moors stretching from Northern England to the Cairngorms. If indeed the predator control carried out by estates helps black grouse it’s because they’ve reduced their population, like so much else to a highly vulnerable remnant needing to be put on intensive care in the first place. Grouse moors – wildlife nemesis.
Liking your vision – a lek or play area for everything and everyone.
Les – worth remembering two things.
1) It is estimated that 96% of remaining English black grouse are associated with driven grouse moors (where predator control and habitat improvements on the fringes of heather moorland which has helped to stem the decline and increase numbers and range).
2) Between 1998 and 2014 black grouse numbers increase from 773 to 1,437 males, meeting the Species Action Plan target of 1,200 males a year ahead of schedule – a true conservation success. I hope this helps, best, Andrew
Andrew – is the association with grouse moors because they are superimposed upon much of the area that the black grouse would have lived on quite happily since the last ice age without human intervention, and they are now relegated to its margins, grouse moors are very extensive after all? And how do black grouse numbers compare with those of red grouse? Bit unbalanced isn’t it and difficult to say grouse shooting is actually beneficial for black grouse? Try telling us why grouse moors are great for juniper, nightjar, bats etc. There are real habitat mosaics and there are phoney ones. Hope that helps, best, Les
Here in Nidderdale we used to have Black Grouse probably into the early nineties and in the Dales as a whole there were huge populations in the early seventies associated with young forestry. That population went long a go a combination of maturing conifers and alleged killing in and outside the shooting season as pests. Red grouse keepers are not keen on Blacks because they lead reds out of drives in cross winds or when driven against the wind. They are doing better in the Dales again but could be much more widespread if so much of the habitat were not managed for intensive red shooting. Here in Nidderdale they have been reintroduced, this is ironic as the last place they were allegedly got rid of by keepers was Nidderdale. They are of course beautiful birds and that lekking sound is just magic, more of us should be enjoying that almost routinely and intensive red grouse moors means we are not.
I beg to differ P V Irving. What I know from Nidderdale is that the Black Grouse were in part shot out in the 70s, not by keepers, but also suffered under severe weather and winters. The hens are notoriously bad mothers. Earlier this year 10 hens and 3 cock Black Grouse were counted in Nidderdale, and they’re coming back. I know of one spot at the head of the dale where 3,500+ native trees are being planted in the bottom of the dale and stream lines, aimed in part at helping the Black Grouse. If by huge populations of Black Grouse in the Dales, I know of a spot in Teesdale, one of many, where you can see 60+ cocks lekking – it that huge enough for you? You might need to get out of your car though ;-).
As for Mark Avery’s assertion that Red Grouse don’t draw attention to themselves in a similar way to Black Grouse, that’s utter tosh – any number of Red Grouse strutting around, showing themselves, on English moors, right now.
Just finally, I am amazed that Mark Avery is highlighting the economic benefits (to his friends – I’m OK with that) of Black Grouse and birding in North Wales, all of which are some of the same arguments for grouse shooting in the English uplands.
Quoting from Mather ” The Birds of the Harrogate District” Black Grouse account” An apparent improvement in numbers was evident from the mid-1970s and during the 1980s : a female with 6 young was on Carle Fell and a female with young was near Leighton Reservoir in 1977; three broods were on Angram pastures in 1979; parties of birds numbering between 7 and 11 were seen frequently in the Upper Dale between January and April 1980; three nests were found in Howstean Gill in 1983 in which year 4 males and a female were near Ramsgill; up to 7 were seen near Gouthwaite Reservoir in 1986 and a female with young in 1988.
In the Dales in the 1970s the county bird report notes 150 lekking males in Upper Wharfedale in March, with 51 in one small area in November and 50 in one flock in Upper Wensleydale. In 1976 the same area was visited and 40 birds were seen with 26 in one April lek. As to birds being killed by keepers in the 1970s main area keepers were encouraged by the private forestry people to come in to shoot birds at Lek. How do I know, because I have spoken to some of those keepers involved, birds were heavily shot from Langstrothdale, across Cray Moss all the way to Semerwater much of it in the close season. I have also spoken to the keepers responsible for shooting Leks in Nidderdale in the late 80s and early nineties so despite what you think I do know what I’m talking about.
Black Grouse are returning to Nidderdale yes, in part by reintroduction, the irony stands, we lost them because they were not wanted and shot.
As to comparing the economics of bird watching and driven grouse shooting, unlike driven grouse shooting bird watching is not reliant on poor intensive management practices that badly affect others and reduce biodiversity, huge public subsidies or the widespread illegal killing of Hen Harriers, Peregrines, Short eared Owls or Golden Eagles.
With the omission of people actually shooting grouse, many of the management (both land and predator) used on driven grouse moors is adopted in Wales to encourage record black grouse numbers, including heather burning. But I’m sure you, Alan and Ruth are already aware of that Mark?
https://naturalresources.wales/about-us/news-and-events/news-releases/rare-bird-numbers-nearly-back-to-record-breaking-high-in-north-wales/?lang=en
I recently attended a talk on Hen Harriers by Keith Offord.
Although he basically wished that driven Grouse moors did not exist, he supported the Heather burning that takes place in his area of Wales under conservation agreements,(there seemed a fair bit of it going by his photos ),although obviously a far cry from the intensive management so often portrayed in articles criticising the practice.
He also has a nice lot of Blackgame ,but thought the poor numbers and fledging success of Curlew and other waders, is possibly in part down to the larger Corvids present.
It made a change to hear somebody of this mind, giving his opinions to an audience probably more used to hearing the party line….ban all burning and predator control, and leave the uplands to themselves.
There are obviously excesses in moorland management, but there is no one size fits all, and many moorland estates have thriving numbers of black Grouse.
Dr Avery should make better use of experts in their field before committing himself to print.
He could start with Patrick Laurie, author of “The Black Grouse”. An excellent book authored by someone with real life experience and study of the bird and its habitat.
Incidentally, Chris Land, who ran black grouse surveys for the Southern Uplands Partnership in the Borders several years ago wrote in a letter which I have taken the opportunity to copy from Patrick Laurie’s blog;
“It was heartening to hear of the tree-planting initiative for black grouse by the Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust (report, June 24).
However, woodlands are not the primary habitat of the species, despite much wishful thinking.
Focusing conservation efforts on woodlands will not benefit black grouse, whose main cause of decline is the loss of moorland habitats – ironically due to tree planting, predation and poor ground cover caused by over-grazing.
After 60 years of woodland creation in the Southern Uplands, black grouse number around 200 lekking males, and are now almost entirely to be found on a few grouse moors.
Urgent action to restore lost moorlands is required in this area.”
James Whyte – you must tell that to Scandinavia!
“Studies which link black grouse to woodland are often carried over from Scandinavia, and much is lost in translation. Commercial forestry in Galloway has a totally different ecological dynamic to Swedish woodlands, and history shows that British birds (which are a separate race*) prosper in much more open habitats.”
Patrick Laurie
*The UK subspecies, Tetrao tetrix britannicus, is endemic to Britain, occurring no where else in the world.
“Moorland was the most selected habitat in most groups. Males also showed high
selection for farmland and broadleaf woodland. Forestry (closed-canopy and unplanted
patches) and new native pinewood habitats were generally avoided relative to moorland, except in adult females in autumn-winter (both) and spring-summer (new native pinewood). 78% birds using forestry moved < 600 m from the external edge. Such movements appeared greatest where larch and/or substantial unplanted areas
(clearings/rides) were present. Females were associated with taller ground vegetation,
higher densities of trees and more coniferous tree species (particularly larch)."
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 545
Spatial and structural habitat requirements of black grouse in Scottish forests
"The reality is that while woodland can contribute towards a healthy blend of habitats, the birds are fundamentally based on a blend of well-managed moorland and farmland. Dumfries and Galloway has lost two thirds of its heather moorland and hill country to forestry since the Second World War. If it were as simple as “more trees = more black grouse”, we’d be drowning in birds and the foresters would be stamping on their nests to keep their numbers down as they did in the 1960s and 70s."
Patrick Laurie
“Weavers – post your comment/question where it is relevant and it’ll be answered. ”
OK Mark, will you debate the apparent hypocrisy of your polar opposite views on moorland management here then?
Bara – that’s not a very promising start is it? What’s on your mind?
Apologies if it came across slightly obtuse Mark, but it’s been an incredibly frustrating process to try and get you to discuss the subject in a reasonable manner. Glib replies from you in the other thread probably sowed the seeds of that frustration – as I mentioned in my last reply, it is fair to say the points raised are applicable to any blog post that attempts to portray moorland management as wholly negative.
Without having to write the entire series of points again (both the ones you’ve posted and the ones you decided not to post), I’m interested to hear why there appears to be a genuine appreciation of the obvious benefits of moorland management carried out at Ruabon, but there’s never any mention of it, either in your blog post, nor any every in Biggest Twitch blog either. I really feel there should be a clear distinction on your part as to when managed moorland is acceptable, and when it isn’t. Do you not have any concerns over some of the misinformation that’s being actively pushed on social media, and how that will/may impact on areas where similar management process are employed for the benefit of at risk species, and not for driven grouse? For what it’s worth, I visit the Clwydian range on a regular basis and have already heard some poorly thought out discussions regarding the management of the area, and I’m sorry to say this blog came up in some of those conversations on more than one occasion. I feel that may directly impact in the future viability of the black grouse revival, a species very close to my heart, if a small (but vocal) minority begin to raise issue with the management processes involved. The picture of the burned heather in your blog post, entitled ‘pretty?’ was particularly relevant.
Thanks.
Bara – well, I can’t answer for my friends at the Biggest Twitch.
I can say that this blog does not portray moorland management as wholly negative. You might read Inglorious too to understand what I think and see how I say it.
I don’t mention where the site is do I? That’s partly to reduce disturbance there. And I don’t specifically know about the details of its management – how can I know what has happened on every bit of moorland in the UK?
Most of the places where I have seen Black Grouse in Wales have not been grouse moors by the way.
However, on this blog post I do run through the fact that generally, a less intensive and different management of uplands would benefit Black Grouse at the expense of Red Grouse. It is a myth that Red Grouse management is ideal for Black Grouse. So the fact that this moor is, you say (and I believe) managed for Red Grouse is rather irrelevant to the bigger picture isn’t it?
Have a look at this too http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/petitions-committee/grouse-shooting/written/41655.html there is a lot of nonsense talked about Wales and grouse shooting.
Thanks for the reply Mark. Just a couple of points:
I think you’ve got a small error in there; I assume you meant to say “So the fact this moor is, you say (and I believe) managed for Black Grouse [not Red], is rather irrelevant to the bigger picture isn’t it”.
So, if I’m correct in assuming you made a small error in the reply, then ‘no’, the moor isn’t managed specifically for black grouse. Perhaps not as much a myth as you suggest. It’s no coincidence that the majority of Black Grouse in the UK reside either directly in, or on the periphery of managed moorland, whilst on un-managed moors they fair rather less-well. The obvious beneficiary to the management practices employed at the moor have been the Black Grouse, but that’s not the overall objective, if I’ve given the impression it was the sole intentional goal then I apologise, I hard tried to ensure I didn’t say that. Not sure if you’re aware but:
http://www.leaderlive.co.uk/lifestyle/2017/07/28/gallery/tenant-sought-for-ruabon-moor-described-as-the-grouse-capital-of-north-wales-91771/
Does that throw a bit of a spanner in the hypothesis that moorland management employed solely for red grouse aren’t particularly favourable for black?
Whilst I accept your suggestion you’ve personally seen more black grouse in Wales in areas other than the moor mentioned, it’s widely regarded by all groups/conservation bodies/RSPB etc that Ruabon contains the highest concentrations in Wales.
I’ve read your submission supplied in the link. One point that did leap out as, at best out of date (and now inaccurate):
“We know from carefully conducted national surveys of Hen Harriers that the Welsh population of Hen Harriers has increased in numbers from 28 pairs in 19983, to 43 pairs in 20044 to 57 pairs in 20105 (and we await the results of the 2016 survey which will bring these figures up to date.”
We both know where that went, don’t we?
As for this statement:
“how can I know what has happened on every bit of moorland in the UK?”
Well, it’s fair to say the management success at Ruabon isn’t exactly the nation’s best kept secret Mark. It’s directly at odds to much of the blog posts you make that attempt to suggest intensive management for red grouse benefits red grouse only. Is it not fair to suggest that its omission, both here and on other blogs, is more of an intentional omission and a conscious decision, rather than a claim of ‘not knowing the management regimes employed”. Even the most brief overview of the area in Google Earth would leave the viewer in no doubt of the intensity of the management. Both yourself and RPUK have previously used GE grabs to highlight moorland management, so I firmly believe you’re only too aware of what it looks like.
Bara – the moor is a grouse moor primarily managed for Red Grouse isn’t it? But as I said, I don’t know of the management details of every patch of heather in the British uplands. My point is that management for Red Grouse isn’t perfect for Black Grouse and we could have much higher numbers of Black Grouse if we moved away from driven (Red) grouse shooting.
It may well be the case that Ruabon has the highest densities of Black Grouse in Wales but that’s an anecdote. When I left the RSPB, Geltsdale had the highest densities of wintering Black Grouse in the north Pennines – but that’s another anecdote. I am not aware of any national survey which looks at whether Black Grouse are particularly dependent on grouse moors (does such exist? Please tell me and I’ll look at it) and a glance at the Breeding Atlas suggests that they can’t be because they live in lots of places where there aren’t driven grouse moors. But even if they were, my point is that a bit of rewilding would benefit Black Grouse an awful lot and that will never happen on grouse moors.
The Hen Harrier survey data showed declines everywhere – there are still lots more HH in Wales (practically no grouse shooting) compared with England (loads of grouse shooting) despite the fact that there ought to be an awful lot more of them, given the available habitat in England, so the point remains.
You misrepresent my views by saying that I suggest that management for Red Grouse shooting benefits only Red Grouse – I don’t believe I’ve ever said that – so it’s not at odds with anything. And, again, you’re using an anecdote (or a case study) to make a general claim – that’s not very convincing.
My two posts weren’t about Ruabon specifically were they? One was about a day’s birdwatching and the other was about this issue of Red v Black Grouse.
Well, perhaps it might be an idea to research the management details of specific areas before making assumptions in blog posts Mark. You’re Black v Red post was written the day after you visited Ruabon more with Alan Davis and Ruth Miller, and then proceeds to give the reader the the impression that they thrive on the moor you visited specifically because it isn’t intensively managed for red grouse. That’s wholly inaccurate, and if you’re simply claiming you weren’t aware of the management details employed there then the salient point should be that you should check before making (incorrect) assumptions. You’re doing it again with your ‘Pretty’ post. Yes, it plays to the baying sycophants Mark, the majoriyt of whom can’t actually be bothered to look at the bigger picture. Duncun Orr-Ewing seems to be at odds with your assumption that rewilding offers the best chance for Black Grouse reassurance;
“We know that it can decline in population quite rapidly… it does require human management to help it thrive and we have to keep a wary eye on how its populations are performing”
Yes, I agree, there are more HH in Wales compared to England, but if your sole piece of evidence to that point is the fact that Wales has no DGS but England does, then it’s countered as simply by the fact Scotland has a much larger population of HH than Wales, and a much higher concentration of DGS as well. The problems facing our HH populations are far more varied than the simple, binary ‘persecution’ argument. It certainly isn’t helping, it certainly isn’t solely responsible for regional population variations (as the latest counts clearly demonstrate), but the removal of moorland management (DGS) will not, in itself, improve the situation significantly. It certainly will negatively impact on some species that have been facing worrying declines Mark. I feel your blind pursuit of that ultimate objective is, at best both reckless and incredibly short-sighted.
As for holding up Geltsdale as any form of model for Black Grouse management. Come on, are you serious! http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/earthcomment/charlesclover/3340477/RSPB-accused-over-birds-on-flagship-reserve.html
Bara – this post doesn’t do that. Read it again.
The quote from Duncan is not at odds with my views.
Almost all of the HH in Scotland nest away from driven grouse moors- which you should know – and which supports my point and massacres yours.
Your quote from the Telegraph is not about Black Grouse and is nearly 10 years old down – have you been saving it for now? My remark about Black grouse is 3 years more recent than that.
The middle ground, the direction we should all be pushing for, is this excellent piece by Colin McClean. And, of course, directly at odds with your accusations against the entire driven grouse industry.
https://www.glentanar.co.uk/blog/managing-grouse-at-glen-tanar
Bara – including this quote ‘For me there is little political threat to grouse shooting provided the sector obeys the law of the land. There are far too many jobs involved for politicians to take action lightly. However obeying the law is a must and this remains a challenge for some. The recent review of satellite tagging of golden eagles shows an unambiguous pattern of regular disappearances above grouse moors when they rarely disappear over anywhere else. For me it’s not the RSPB or campaigners like Chris Packham or Mark Avery who threaten grouse shooting. They are just campaigning for the law to be obeyed. The threat to grouse shooting comes from those who refuse to abide by the law and continue to persecute raptors. If a ban ever does come about, then the responsibility for losing all the traditions, all the economy and all the jobs will lie entirely at their door.’ which I support fully.
Make no mistake Mark, I’m as anti raptor persecution as you are, be in no doubt about that fact. That is the only part the latest petition gets right, the only part. The rest of it is inaccurate clap-trap gleaned from disingenuous blog posts and social media hysteria, and it’s those who really need to take a long hard look in the mirror as to what it is they’re hoping to achieve, The ‘ultimate goal’ will have a net negative impact on the prosperity of our uplands, and I don’t think for a minute you aren’t aware of that.
9 successful Hen Harrier nests at Leadhills this year Mark (yes I know it’s not currently driving grouse to guns, but it’s still a managed moor). And yes, I’m only too aware of the dreadful video of the female HH being shot. If ever there was a clear indication as to the ‘real’ conflict in our uplands, it is those two examples. We need one aspect, we don’t need the other. The current petition is a shocking example of ignorance and lack of understanding as to the real issues, and I don’t think for one moment you’re not aware of that.