Well actually, Martin said that six years ago, and he could say just the same thing now when another UK survey shows that numbers have declined again and Martin’s children are six years older.
It’s a tricky problem, but little progress is being made on solving it. We know what the problem is but we are all finding it difficult to stop wildlife crime in our uplands: that’s because government is not doing its bit, the opposition in Westminster hasn’t really got hold of this issue and the perpetrators keep on perpetrating.
The RSPB appears to think that the solution lies in talking nicely to moorland managers but there isn’t much evidence that is true. We have seen no moorland owner in England break loose from the pack and say anything sensible about wildlife crime and challenge his (or her) fellow moor owners to clean up their act. The rhetoric of denial remains the same from year to year, and the numbers of Hen Harriers on the moors remain at levels close to zero.
What’s to be done? Well the RSPB keeps mentioning that if things go on as they are then the public will turn against driven grouse shooting, big time! Here are just two examples. Mike Clarke said this at the Game Fair in 2014 ‘But the longer it takes any industry to address its problems, the stronger those calls [for an all-out ban on driven grouse shooting] will become.’.
Then last week Martin wrote that unless grouse shooting cleans up its act ‘public confidence in grouse shooting will deteriorate even further putting into question the future of driven grouse shooting‘.
I’m sure that’s true, but the RSPB has the power, and perhaps the duty, to bring that time closer by standing up more publicly for change in the uplands. More time engaging the RSPB’s membership and the media, and less time engaging the moorland owners, is surely the way forward. What have we heard of the RSPB’s plans for licensing of shooting in England since the grouse shooting debate in Westminster last October? Where are the reports on flood risk and economics to keep the pressure on the moorland mismanagers to change their ways? These have been talked about but they aren’t in the pipeline.
It is inconceivable that the RSPB believes that the Hen Harrier’s fortunes will improve unless something changes. What is the plan?
I wonder if there would be any mileage in inviting Michael Gove to the Bird Fair just to help him guage the passion in our interest
Royal Society for the PROTECTION of Birds……it’s failing big time with hen harriers. Time for the RSPB to ‘man-up’ I think.
I couldn’t like this comment so I will say well said here instead
Come on RSPB, the time has come to shout louder or shout at all. The quiet diplomacy is falling on deaf ears. As a long standing member who has supported you through all this, I back a change in approach and more emphasis on “Protection”.
The RSPB had a plan for Avocets, it worked. They had a plan for Bitterns, that worked.
However, the existence of these birds doesn’t upset anyone. Faced with a bird that upsets the rich and powerful, including their friends in government, the RSPB doesn’t have an answer and prefers to spend membership money on talks and initiatives. Keep it all low key and the majority of the membership will not find out the truth and assume you are doing something.
But then, there are Hen Harrier days.
Why Hen Harriers? Most people will have heard of Peregrines, everybody loves owls, most would be appalled at the mountain bunnies (ok, hares then) being slaughtered. But Hen Harriers? What’s a Hen Harrier?
There is a march in August and all will recognise the fox and badger on the poster, but what’s that bird? What’s it doing there?
We know about fox hunting, we know that badgers are being culled, seen it on the telly. How did that bird get in on the act?
How do you gain support for a critter that nobody has ever heard of?
And it is that lack of awareness that is making it easy for the RSPB to do nothing, and for the landed gentry to get away with literal murder.
Maybe our Hen Harrier day should be ‘save our wildlife from being slaughtered’ day.
OK, doesn’t really have the same ring to it I guess, but you get the picture.
Now, going back to my earlier point. Few people will have heard of Avocets and Bitterns but the RSPB publicised their plight, sent out the usual begging letters and gained support for these species.
The RSPB have yet to send out a plea for the Hen Harrier or ask for funds to support their fight for it. Why not? They should. Now.
Paul exactly the problem, something like well over sixty million UK residents do not give a shit about Hen Harriers and the RSPB are not bothered about changing that even many RSPB members are probably in that number and that definitely could be changed.
Through all this, the passion of Martin Harper is a shining light????.
Good point Dennis. What it comes down to is if the RSPB shows it does not care enough why should it’s members and the wider public. That is a very sorry state of affairs for the leading European wildlife charity.
Well Mark, I could not agree more with your comment “the RSPB has the power, and perhaps the duty, to bring that time closer by standing up more publicly for change in the uplands. More time engaging the RSPB’s membership and the media, and less time engaging the moorland owners, is surely the way forward”.
Will they change tack – that is the question. The answer should be in their title The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds. If there is one bird in the country that needs their protection it is the Hen Harrier.
Moorland owners have their own organisations and should not need to rely on the RSPB to make excuses for them.
With or without support from the management of the RSPB, we will get there.
I struggle to see any rationale/justification for RSPB’s lack of effective action on this issue. Time was when RSPB was a formidable lobbying organisation, now we’re into “like being savaged by a dead sheep” territory.
I would respect, even though I don’t agree with, their decision to push licencing rather than a ban. But I can’t respect the lack of action by them to promote what they say is their preferred solution.
A forceful campaign for licencing would assuage a lot of our criticism. But RSPB doesn’t seem to be doing anything. Instead, as a member, I hear…silence. Pull your bleedin’ finger out and start screaming blue murder! Be the Good Cop to our Bad Cop by all means, but please, stop being a stooge.
Jbc, wish I could have ‘liked’ that. Exactly so.
Judging by the comments here, you’re preaching to the converted, Mark. I would argue that the RSPB is doing lots. It’s clearly taken a decision to make public all the persecution evidence it gets asap unless there is a very good reason not to, and it’s trying to get as much evidence as it can. Scotland is, hopefully, going to show the way forward with licensing. Lots more tagging is being done which will make what’s happening ever clearer. No doubt RSPB also have stuff in hand that, for good reasons, they choose not to make public.
If you’re going to pick a fight, it’s important to have a good chance of winning and timing is everything. You are not going to get what you want under the present UK government and neither (licensing in England) is the RSPB. It’s almost as if some people blame the RSPB for the current situation. Politics and conservation is the art of the possible.
Bob W – some truth in what you say. But neither conservation nor politics is solely the art of the possible – both are about fighting for what you believe in. You won’t get votes or members, unless of course you buy either, unless you fight for a cause and rally people around you. You need to win some, but you need to be fighting for the right things.
Btw – I’m not at all sure the RSPB is the majority shareholder in raptor tagging at the moment – others are funding much of it and doing much of it.
Thanks, Mark. I suppose, in a nutshell, I don’t want the RSPB to be pressured into upping the stakes in a fight that, at the moment, can’t be won, especially when there is now so much at stake in UK conservation.
With reference to comments on your earlier blog, I too had heard similar rumours about Langholm and it might be best to take the findings with a huge pinch of salt. It seemed very odd that they did not try to resume shooting when grouse numbers had increased. What has surprised me is that (as far as I know) there has been no disease-driven crash in grouse numbers on the most intensively managed moors – obviously medication has worked so far but that may not last, and that would change the economics completely.
Didn’t the RSPB form to protect Bird feathers being used in the fashion trade which helped the Great Crested Grebe survive. The society should maintain this protective stance today
Just been studying the statutes of the RSPB (of which I’ve been a member for 44 years) and note there is a facility for members to call for an Extraordinary General Meeting to discuss a particular issue which requires signatures of 0.5% of the membership. One might think if members cared enough they would be campaigning for votes to call an egm to hold RSPB Council to account on their lack of effective action on Hen Harrier conservation. That’s 60,000 signatures required. Has RSPB ever had such an initiative from members? What are the drawbacks?
Sorry Mark my maths was a bit out. With 2.3 million members 0.5% is around 12,000. Much easier!
More like 1.3 million members unless I’m mistaken. Bringing it down to just 6,500. Still, i’m sure the RSPB doesn’t need an EGM to realise that a vocal minority of members are fired up about this issue. Which makes its lack of more resolute action all the more surprising. Or is it not too bothered about what members think, providing membership numbers continue to rise?
Approx. 1.2million members at the last annual review. that’s 6,000.
Always an agnostic, but also a realist (with a fair few decades of campaigning endeavour under my belt) but do you really think 12,000 RSPB members (a) have heard about the plight of Hen Harriers (b) would actually sign a motion to be put to the AGM to take action?
Governance, certainly of the larger NGOs is ‘structured’ to ensure that it is manageable by the powerful few and their loyal staff?
The RSPB to be fair, along with other conservation charities are effectively ‘gagged’ by the lobbying act. So, why waste energy and provide enjoyment to the grousers by lambasting the Royal Protectionists?
Hen Harrier Days, days of action and social media and the likes of Raptor Persecution UK, Raptor Politics websites, BAWC and Mark et. al. continue to raise the profile as well as irritating the law abiding grousers behind whom the ‘few bad apples’ hide?
If memory serves me right, someone recently organised a petition regarding banning grouse shooting that got quite a few signatures? Something like 123,077 i think?
Wonder if any of those signatories are still around?
Many of whom must surely have been RSPB members.
I think the RSPB could make a huge impact without sticking its head too far above the parapet.
Simply making its rank-and-file members fully aware of what goes on and showing them the graphic evidence of illegal killing, stink pits and the rest would be a huge step forward. It would have to be in ‘Nature’s Home’ or something that reached the less well informed as well as the serious birders, but it wouldn’t have to include detailed proposals or tirades against the government or the shooting industry. Just let the membership know, in a clear and unequivocal way, and see how they respond.
Alan, the RSPB does show its members graphic evidence of illegal killing and lots more on the Hen Harrier situation – see page 42 of the current (Summer 2017) edition of Nature’s Home. And the shooting video and the pheasant pole trap were both on the home page of the RSPB website.
Sorry, Bob, I had in mind something a bit more dramatic than that! Compare the photos on page 42 with those of the Marbled White on p.14, the Swift on p. 29 and the Puffins on pp. 336-37 (and many others). It’s there all right, but in just about the most unobtrusive way possible.
I commented previously about the almost deliberately boring headline chosen to lead website readers to the shooting video (‘Court proceedings against gamekeeper dropped’, or words to that effect).
It’s almost as if the RSPB want to disturb the majority of their membership as little as possible on this issue without being criticised for burying it altogether.
Thanks, Alan. Well, the photo caught my eye. I think you (and others) are being very unfair on the RSPB – as I have commented before, they are doing more than anyone else in this area. As for “the almost deliberately boring headline” on the shooting video, I find the fuzzing of faces and use of the word “alleged” in such circumstances very frustrating but no doubt that is following legal advice.
Mark got over 100,000 votes for his petition. I would be very, very surprised if fewer than 6,000/6,500 of those were RSPB members! That doesn’t mean I support this as a strategy, I agree with Nimby’s comments.
You started your blog with a comment about Martin Harper. Although not specific to DGS I found his blog this morning very interesting and well worth a read: http://www.rspb.org.uk/community/ourwork/b/martinharper/archive/2017/07/04/the-future-of-wildlife-law.aspx
Richard – yes that’s an interesting blog isn’t it.
I hate to say this but having supported fight against Hen Harrier persecution for many years their seems to be massive problems for HHs that are extremely difficult to overcome unless RSPB gets seriously in the fight.
One reason is crime is most prevalent where it is difficult to catch culprits,where it is easy to commit without much chance of getting caught,where if culprit caught the sentence is very very lenient.
This fits Hen Harrier crime exactly.
The other problem is in my opinion only about 0.25 of population care about our HHs and even if anyone queries that figure and quadruples it then it is still a significant tiny number that only the RSPB in my opinion could significantly increase.
As far as I am concerned the landowners and the tory party are the same thing, its this barrier that will have to breached before any meaningful changes happen. One of Theresa Mays election pledges was to allow a vote on fox hunting, says it all!!!!
For years I’ve questioned the apparent loss of direction the RSPB has been taking. It’s been interesting testing the views of their staff and members about this perception. I don’t intend to breach any confidences, but there are some definite conflicting schools of thought within the organisation. Just a few years ago this came across quite sharply when the RSPB Director wrote a guest editorial in one of the shooting community’s most popular magazines, stressing the fact that shooters and bird conservationists “shared common objectives.” This of course gave the impression that the Royal Society for the PROTECTION of Birds was somehow content with the idea that slaughtering wild birds for fun was reconcilable with their attempts to increase the populations of quarry species. Those in favour of this approach, who just so happened mostly to be staff who moved into promoted posts, justified this stance by using the mantra which appeared from nowhere, that… “we are a conservation body, not an animal welfare group.” Do these people with authority in the RSPB really believe that these two objectives are not compatible? My experience is that the hard working staff members lower down the incremental scale tend not to be very happy about this distinction. In general, ordinary members are bamboozled by this apparent inconsistency, nay hypocrisy.
My experience is that staff across the RSPB, at all ‘levels’, fully appreciate why the organisation is focused on conservation rather than animal welfare. It’s perfectly reasonable to work with farmers who happen to shoot. Fair enough to reduce fox predation to help ground nesting birds recover.