26 Replies to “RSPB publishes video of trapped Peregrine from Bowland grouse moor”

  1. And the excellent blog from Raptor Persecution has prompted my resignation from the RSPB which appears to be both sans teeth and sans spine in my view.

    1. But this video is only available because of the work of RSPB. The impact it will inevitably have is all the result of the work of RSPB (and others involved in publicising it).

    2. Its not the RSPB you should be directing your anger against but those taking part in this type of activity! At the same time we all need to do more politically to get our politicians to sit up and take action!

    3. So the RSPB gather this evidence inform the police who gather more evidence and the whole is presented to the CPS and it goes to court. However the case falls for one reason a poor prosecution brief provided by CPS. You as a result resign from RSPB! Your grasp of logic seems astoundingly different from mine.

  2. Andrew, I agree that the RSPB could do more, and certainly in this case could and should have named the estate, and afterwards highlighted this video and the estate in their publications to the general membership. It is difficult to see how the estate or the unnamed individual could bring a case against the RSPB for doing so. If they did, fine, lets get the case back to a civil court this time. I’ll chip in to help the RSPB.
    However, it is better to fight from within, rather than away from the RSPB, in my opinion, and I admit to being opinionated.

  3. Alex, it’s hard to know how to fight from within. Every time i have contacted the RSPB to express my concerns or to question a policy I receive a very corporate reply from them. Most recently in their use of Larsen traps which are cruel and historic concerns such as the culling of goat’s and famously the Ruddy Duck. I feel they have lost their radical edge and now try to be all things to all people. Raptor persecurion aside, i feel that the shooting of grouse is, in itself cruel, but the RSPB are “Neutral ” on game shooting. I have been a member of the RSPB for many years and haven’t made this decision lightly

    1. Are you opposed to culling in all circumstances? Deer and goats have no natural predators in the UK and if their numbers are allowed to proliferate unchecked this results in damage to rare plants and woodland habitats through over-grazing/browsing (already a widespread problem) and, ultimately, to the animals suffering from poor welfare and dying from starvation. It seems to me that culling is a necessary measure to address this.
      With respect to predator control, I object to the extermination policies and practices of the shooting fraternity who won’t tolerate any predators on their land but I can accept a carefully targeted culling of small numbers of predators for a clearly defined conservation purpose (such as protecting a tern colony).
      The RSPB is a conservation organisation rather than an animal welfare organisation and I do not see any problem with them being neutral with respect to shooting as long as they are prepared to actively fight against any shooting-related practices with adverse conservation outcomes. There are other organisations which exist to promote animal welfare and each is most effective if it sticks to its core purpose and expertise (or should we be demanding the RSPCA to be opposing cat ownership, say, on the grounds of predation on song birds?).

    2. Ah the ruddy duck issue… you’d have to ask Mark Avery about that one… and probably ‘resign’ from this blog.

      1. Jellyfish – indeed, or read Ch5 of Fighting for Birds where I set out my thoughts in general (and particular). The Chapter is entitled ‘Is it ever right to be nasty to birds?’

  4. Andrew, it’s clear from your statements that your stance on many issues are different from mine. I accept the RSPB position on predator control and have participated in lethal control of 2 invasive species, although not with the RSPB. My only issue is with their less aggressive position after a wildlife crime is evident, and I am happy that they continue to monitor nests for scientific purposes. Even if it is mishandled by the justice system, it demonstrates the cause of nest failures and bird deaths, giving the lie to the media position and that of estate representatives as well as increasing knowledge.

  5. I’m not proposing to resign my RSPB membership, but I quite understand Andrew’s frustration.
    I admire the excellent work that goes into obtaining these videos, but I can hardly see the point of them. Prosecutions are vanishingly rare and seem to have little impact, and the videos are not publicised effectively. I can only repeat what I wrote over at RPUK:
    ‘Wouldn’t it be great if the RSPB and everyone else could work so that this latest footage is viewed by more than the paltry 20,857 who watched the HH being shot last year, the 10,862 who watched the MH nest destruction, and the 6,896 for the Gos nest disturbance.’ These numbers represent minute fractions of the RSPB membership.
    I find the RSPB’s stance baffling – I can only assume that they are so in thrall to the landed gentry that their strategy is to rock the boat as little as possible while being able to claim they’re busy doing something.
    A bit like NE…

    1. Indeed, Alan, a bit like NE sums things up entirely! I wonder if this video will come to me via the RSPB regular email contact?

  6. How extraordinary. But it’s what usually happens. The RSPB expose something vile and then get a load of shit from people commenting on this blog and RPUK, almost as if the RSPB were to blame. Very, very sad.

    1. Bob – actually, I take some exception to your comment.
      If you see something vile and you are a very large and potentially very powerful organisation, shouldn’t you make a real effort to put a stop to it?
      Isn’t there a moral responsibility on you to do so? Isn’t there a moral responsibility towards your investigation staff to make best use of the footage they work so hard to obtain? And if you don’t do these things, shouldn’t you expect to be criticised?
      And who here has ever suggested in any way that the RSPB is to blame for raptor persecution?

    2. Bob, is that really a fair comment? We all know that the RSPB do some fantastic work, and we also know that the team that set up this video is the top of the tree. The But here is that the RSPB have 1.2 million members, most of whom will never see this video because if it is mentioned at all, it will be hidden away on page 41 of Nature’s Home news section.
      How about we all put our minds together to come up with a way of ensuring a million people see this video.

      1. Alan and Paul. The RSPB have made this public in a particular way, no doubt on good legal advice. Someone says they have resigned their membership as a result – words fail me…

  7. It’s probably of little relevance now, but the four shots seem, to me, to come from the same gun.
    This would imply the shooter holds the weapon on a Firearm, as opposed to a shotgun certificate.
    If I am wrong, two people were involved.

  8. I’d like to just make a general point about illegal raptor persecution, and the usual excuses about the inadmissibility of evidence, difficulties in bringing prosecutions.

    In most instances of where it is realised that a crime is widespread and increasing, but it proves difficult to bring successful prosecutions, the government and the authorities have brought in new powers, laws and regulations to make detection and prosecution of these crimes easier. Along with allocating more resources to investigating and prosecuting these cases. Yet for some reason this has never happened with illegal raptor persecution, and it’s not rocket science to understand the reasons why.

    The beneficiaries of this wildlife crime are big shooting estates often owned by senior members of the establishment, who have strong links to the present government. This is why the failure to take appropriate action, to give the authorities the necessary powers, and resources, is institutional corruption.

    Compare the foot dragging with addressing this serious problem of persistent crime, with how rapidly the previous Conservative government bought in new laws and powers when raves became widespread, and to tackle hunt saboteurs. It just proves that if governments want to tackle a problem they know how to do it. But in this instance they persist with out-dated powers and laws, and just say we can’t do anything, because the last thing in the world they want is for the perpetrators of this wildlife crime to be detected and successfully prosecuted.

  9. People become frustrated Bob by the apparent inability of the RSPB to use the information collected by their diligent field workers to best advantage. It is perfectly reasonable to wonder why it has taken so long to release this video to public scrutiny and ask why it has not been passed to national media outlets.

    1. Sandra and others – I don’t know the answer to that question but if RPUK are right then this video was used (or was available to use) in a court case in April. I can well imagine that lawyers would take this long before being absolutely clear about the legalities of use of the video. What we have seen seems enough for RPUK who were at the court case, remember, to put two and two together and name the estate as Bleasdale – it seems likely they are correct. The RSPB may well have been advised not to name the estate for some (presumably good) reason. Assuming that RPUK is right about the estate, then we need to thank them, as so often, for their brilliant work.

      As it happens, publishing this video a few days before the Inglorious 12th and Hen Harrier Day isn’t such bad timing is it? If it had come out next week then there would have been more to complain about, I think.

  10. As I understand it this case fell because the prosecution case was so poorly handled by their man in court that despite prompting by the judge to give her a reason for carrying on and dismissing the defence objections, he failed to do so when there are adequate provisions in English law for him to have done so. NOT RSPBs FAULT and they have been advised not to name the estate, personally I think that wrong. It was Bleasdale estate owned by Mr Jeremy Duckworth who resigned as the Moorland Assoc. Lancashire board member when the case was being investigated. Apparently the accused no longer works for the estate, perhaps an admission of guilt that he has lost his job? This estate has a very poor history when it comes to Peregrine and Hen Harrier nesting success.
    Peregrines have such a poor success rate on grouse moors in northern England and probably Scotland that the sort of behaviour or at least PERSECUTION of some sort MUST BE ROUTINE ON MOST GROUSE MOORS there is no other explanation.
    Yes RSPB are not perfect but unlike many they are at least trying and the one department that stands out above all in this is, Investigations, doing a damned difficult job with dignity and integrity. They deserve our unwavering support.

  12. I know I’m going to get a lot of comments to this, but here it goes.
    As a lover of grouse shooting, I am appalled by raptor persecution. Rather than say a Bowland Grouse moor, name it. Only then can shooters boycott the moors that break the law.
    Grouse shooting can survive and work with raptor conservation. The hard line from both arguments need to sit down and get a proper plan in place and stick to it.
    I manage a low ground shoot, we have nesting buzzards, red kites and peregrines on the land plus many more hawk type species. The kites and buzzards are so many in number now it is at a detriment to hares and ground nesting birds. We try to supplement feed to give wildlife a chance. It was a wonderful sight of more than 20 kites feeding on a fallow carcass in the snows earlier this year.

  13. Bungee, I hope you don’t receive any abusive replies.
    My reply would be that you can’t talk (it’s been tried endlessly) to serial liars and constant deniers.
    I’m sure the hard line grouse shooters would love to talk, because that would mean the status quo continues (ie raptor eradication).

Comments are closed.