An immature White-tailed Eagle from the Isle of Wight reintroduction project has spent a few daysin Northants recently, at Pitsford Reservoir, before continuing its wanderings southwards into Oxfordshire and maybe back to its release site on the IoW. Here in Northants we don’t really consider ourselves to be within striking distance of ther IoW but then few of us are eagles.
Back in the spring, during lockdown, the very same bird, with its satellite tag, flew all through Northants, mostly along the line of the River Nene, one day, and ended up in northwest Norfolk at Ken Hill – a site which is rewilding – see guest blog (click here). An interesting feature of the Wild Ken Hill rewilding project is the strong emphasis the landowners put on farm production alongside nature production.
At the time, I thought that it was interesting the young eagle went to that very location because it took me back some 15 years to when there were plans to reintroduce White-tailed Eagles to that same part of East Anglia (and the Suffolk coast was also considered) which met fierce opposition from landowners.
I remember, it would have been in 2009 I reckon, going to a meeting (as RSPB) with a Conservative MP who told me, somewhat gleefully, he had just got off the ‘phone telling Natural England that they should drop their plans to be involved in (eg fund and licence) such a scheme if they knew what was good for them in the future when the Conservative party would be in power (which did indeed seem like a certainty, and did indeed come to pass).
So I was interested to see (in the Guardian) that the idea of reintroducing White-tailed Eagles to Norfolk has been revived, and it is Wild Ken Hill that are leading the way again (see here). Encouragingly, more than 20 farmers and groups have pledged support for the scheme.
Predictably there is hysteria being whipped up locally about the scheme – see here and here – and entirely predictably it is the NFU leading the way with the alarmist talk (just as they did on the Isle of Wight). I haven’t seen the evidence for losses of lambs on the Isle of Wight that were predicted – maybe I’ve missed them? This is the corner of the UK where many farmers have successfully lobbied government to reverse a neonic ban which was introduced on environmental grounds and now that same farming community is leading the charge against a native predator being reintroduced by one of their fellow land owners. It will be interesting to see how this pans out all these years after farmers saw off eagle reintroductions here in the past.
It will be particularly interesting to see what some local landowners make of this project. Wild Ken Hill is close to Snettisham and Titchwell RSPB nature reserves and the RSPB is keen on the idea. It’s not many flaps from NWT’s reserves at Holme and Cley either but I haven’t seen any comment from them. And Holkham with its Conservation Manager (the sensible Jake Fiennes) who is managing to turn around the less than favourable reputation of the site for raptors is in the same area – I wonder what they will think?
But back in 2008-10 it was widely said that Wild Ken Hill’s near-neighbours the Sandringham Estate were very much opposed to the reintroduction project. I can’t be 100% sure that was the case, but it was what ‘everybody’ understood at the time. Over a decade later the Royal Family has aged and the younger generation has a slightly more environmentally friendly face to it. The young Royals are most keen on opposing poaching abroad (see for example Prince William here and Prince Harry here) but the family have not said a word in public about the raptor persecution in their neighbourhood up at Balmoral (see for example here, here) so now they have the opportunity to speak out in favour of a conservation scheme on their very border in Norfolk. Just as Holkham is improving its environmental credentials, Sandringham might want to consider doing the same. We might get an insight into how much the Royals are moving into the modern world by their reaction to the prospect of a few eagles flapping around over their heads.
Which side is the Royal Family on?
[registration_form]
It is important that landowners are now striving to take this project further.
The conservatives have hamstrung EN and kept them in line by bullying and threatening them – let’s see if a critical mass of landowners can make the anti-nature brigade in the party think again.
Bypassing government is sometimes seen as a threat because it promises chaos and deregulation, but when the government is in love with letting people do what they want provided they vote the right way and hand over oodles of dosh – actively making deregulation heir mantra – cutting them out of the deal seems more desirable.
David – such a plan will still need to be licensed by NE remember.
Great question Mark , I wonder if it will be answered . Or allowed to be answered !
The NFU seems incapable of moving any faster than the speed of its slowest members. Meanwhile, forward thinking farmers move ahead without them…..
It would be interesting to know whether both the Patron of the BTO and the Patron of the RSPB are in favour of reintroducing white-tailed eagles into Norfolk especially as they both reside in the area.
I hope they are. A year or two back I was lucky enough to see a juvenile white-tailed eagle at the back of the Holkham Estate. It was calm, well mannered and minding its own business and it made my day.
One could almost say with some justification Alick move ahead, despite the NFU!
Having recently been made all to aware of some sensationalist nonsense elsewhere on the internet and/or some serious head in the sand/total blinkered denial concerning raptors especially Hen Harriers on grouse moors and our increasing Otter populations we should neither underestimate the potential opposition nor their potential impact. They will be largely ecologically illiterate, claim to be open minded, however will be anything but and will have hugely loud voices. These are the same voices that keep beavers in pens rather genuinely wild, stop any sensible discussion of rewilding in many areas and almost certainly have the ear of organisations like the NFU, CLA, CA and some right wing politicians. This is a hugely welcome project but it could easily be stymied by the loud voices of false vested interest and ignorance, a royal on board may be a huge advantage for either side.
The anti otter propaganda is reaching ridiculous heights now. There are an awful lot more anglers than shooters so remarks about them aren’t just as ridiculous and deliberately misleading as they are about birds of prey there are potentially a lot more people making them. I’m very alarmed at the number of times I’m seeing comments from people who I’m positive aren’t anglers, but will repeat the rubbish about otters decimating wildlife and needing control. Very often the comments have been sitting there for quite some time without being challenged.
At the same time that people are becoming more aware and disgusted at what’s happening to birds of prey on grouse moors there’s a counter current trying to sell killing predators for the sake of huntin, fishin, shootin as actually necessary to ‘keep a balance’ for the sake of truly rare wildlife. Songbird Survival was an early example of course. I suspect this has made a lot more headway in influencing public opinion than we’d like to believe. It can be plausible if you don’t have any background information and don’t take time to think things through. I know I often don’t when it’s an issue I might not be either familiar with or interested in. I’m certain there’s an awful lot of illegal killing of otters that’s not being picked up on and even where it is are records being collated centrally?
Well past time that the conservation organisations got together on a pro predation initiative to fight the propaganda. The more native predators we can get back the easier conservation is – pine martens eat far more grey than red squirrels, otters suppress mink numbers, sea eagles may well disperse cormorants, lynx would put a cap on fox numbers, as would making sure there are fewer pheasants to fill their bellies of course.
Absolutely typical. The NFU never fails to oppose any initiative for nature conservation. In addition and as usual we also have a minority of vociferous farmers that are also opposed to any form of nature conservation and who shout their heads off so distorting the true wishes of the majority that would be in favour of the reintroduction.
I think it is very important that Ken Hill liaise with Tim Macrill who lead the Isle of Wight reintroduction so well, In this case there was over eighty percent of local people in favour of the IoW project but again there were some farmers opposed to it and Guess What!!! the NFU opposed it. I think local consultations by Tim and others carried the day. I don’t think so far there has been any significant impact on IoW farmers, as expected.
I don’t think there will be any help from Sandringham, possibly the opposite. The two that are often resident there are too steeped in and tied in with the shooting brigade. They are also too old to change their Victorian beliefs at this stage. Now if the guy whose residence is in Gloucestershire and has a lot of land in Cornwall were to voice an opinion, which is difficult for him, it might be a different story.
What Defra’s NE’s approach will be, is difficult to say at this stage but with the IoW project going ahead it will be more difficult for them to refuse the Ken Hill project especially in the very arrogant way the Tories did in 2009, (typical of course).
Liaise closely with the IOW team is my advice to Ken Hill
I am always struck by how “conservative” farmers are [applies also up here in southern Scotland] when it comes to wildlife conservation and yet they grab with both hands any technological advances such as mega tractors, GM crops, neonics, vast slurry pits etc etc…you would almost think they didnt care about the countryside?
This project is the same Roy Dennis foundation as the IOW project so hopefully liaison with them should be fine.
There are webinars on the Ken Hill project and consultation thursday this week and next week, consultation closes end next week, I think
It’s about moral ownership. NFU is objecting to a challenge to agriculture as the single, all embracing and only use of the countryside. It’s objections are even more extreme than usual – firstly, how many livestock are left in East Anglia ? Second, lowland sheep are a very different proposition to Highland sheep – big, fit, lambed indoors, producing not just Mums but lambs that can look after themselves.
But maybe the comment on Ken Hill speaks volumes ‘farm production alongside nature production.’ Is it wrong that we spare a tiny percentage of our farmed landscape just for nature ? Some of the comments on Knepp would suggest many conservationists feel so – without ever questioning (which is certainly the case at Knepp) whether some of our land should ever have been intensively farmed at all.
I did not anticipate any great problem with IOW sheep ( although i have only visited once, 18 months ago), as Roderick says, it is not the highlands.
However, free-range pigs and poultry could present problems, especially with the gregarious nature of WTE’s, but I
hope the proposal succeeds.
There will soon be no need to drive all the way to Mull.
I’ve always noticed that those same interests that say we need to keep subsidising hill farming, and not return any farmland to wildlife habitat in order to preserve food security never have anything to say about the 40% of it that gets wasted or the farmers selling fields off to developers. Funny that.
Not certain that highland sheep are particularly threatened tbh. Lots of noise but research paid for by us showed no lambs taken in one of the most vociferous areas near Gairloch. There may be a small number of specific cases in eg Mull, but mostly noise. SNH went down the same route with WTE that the Norwegians went with lynx. Pay comp. no questions asked.
I have been lucky enough to have been to Mull I would guess probably seven times and find the Eagles amazing however it would have been better if the RSPB had admitted that WTEs take live lambs of which we now have evidence of which there is no doubt and they knew and kept it hidden for probably two decades.
Regarding something about the 40% of food that gets wasted well that is nothing to do with farmers.It says more about the general public so get them educated and we could almost be self sufficient in food,what a great position that would be.
It only proves our food is so cheap that the general public can afford to throw 40% away.
‘40% of food that gets wasted well that is nothing to do with farmers’- really, don’t they give a shit about what they do? There was me thinking they produced food (maybe it does just magically appear on supermarket shelves after all), and the NFU continually telling us we must keep subsidising marginal farming and can’t return land to wildlife habitat (but selling to developers is ok) because we need to maintain food security. This when we have an obesity epidemic and vast quantities of food go to landfill and mega composting facilities plastic packaging and all. If the NFU is not representing farmers then they’re not exactly rushing forward to contradict it either.
Funny thing Dennis people tend not to like being patronised by those who claim they’re acting selflessly when they’re really incredibly selfish. In this case pushing for public money not to go to the really needy, but towards totally pointless farming the only meaningful contribution of which is towards flooding the homes of some of the very people whose taxes keep them in their homes up in the hills, out of the smog and doing the doggy paddle in the living room. Precious little gratitude or concern from those that think they should somehow be uncritically the permanent recipients of it.
People also don’t appreciate those who try to guillotine honest criticism by screaming their victimhood before debate even begins. Is food that cheap Dennis when we’re paying for it twice, at the checkout and with our taxes? I think the real issue isn’t that food is cheap, it’s actually been produced at an enormous financial, ecological, environmental and social cost that makes its waste exceptionally egregious, but that eaten or not there are some who will be making money from it no matter the expense to everybody and everything else. And the world’s poor still go hungry and the Amazon burns.
Well if anyone has a chip on his shoulder then Les has a whole tree.
There is no way farmers can be blamed for the 40% wasted in fact if they cut production by 40% then some would go seriously hungry and in fact we would end up importing another 40%.
Of course farmers have no duty once the food leaves the farm.
Has there ever been a moaner with more moans than Les Wallace with no justification for his opinion.
Who said anything about cutting production by 40%? It would be virtually impossible to cut any form of waste to zero, but 40% is enormous – 5, 10 or 20% reductions in waste production would be a massive improvement and a step in the right direction. Where is the NFU when it comes to getting the supermarkets, and public, to drop ludicrous ‘cosmetic’ standards that sees perfectly edible fruit and veg dumped?
I noticed you completely avoid the point that an organisation representing farmers claims we have to subsidise highly marginal farming to maintain food security, but has absolutely nothing to say about reducing food wastage which would be a significantly more effective and sensible way of doing so. The technical term for that is taking the piss, as it is for the crofters on Lewis who contribute virtually nothing to the nation’s food supply, but receive eye watering financial support from the rest of us. Meanwhile families in Fort William without access to mains gas freeze and get next to nothing in comparison. And BTW if you want to hear moaning listen to the ‘poor’ crofters who always need more.
I shouldn’t be surprised after my dealings with crofters that it seems many farmers don’t give a toss about what happens to the fruits of their labours as long as they get the money. Incidentally I’ve been highly critical of the insipid nature of the official anti food waste programs and after a fair amount of lobbying managed to get the one in Scotland to make a public reference about the equivalent size of land that would be needed to produce the amount of food the world wastes. It came to the combined area of Mexico and India. That hardly changed the world, but it was a step forward and therefore I’m rather proud to be a ‘moaner’.
And one last bit of ‘moaning’. Tell me Dennis why is it that it was down to George Monbiot, the Woodland Trust and even people like me to sing the praises about the utterly brilliant initiative and resolve of the Pontbren sheep farmers? They independently decided to experiment with the integration of mini forestry on their farms in rather novel ways. They showed how it benefitted their sheep, diversified their sources of income and proved that targeted tree planting could dramatically reduce the speed of run off after rain reducing flood risk to homes, businesses and farms in the lowlands.
To my knowledge there has not been a similar level of promotion (or any at all?) of their work by any farming organisation. Why not publicly applaud a pro active, innovative group of farmers who definitely deserve it? They’d set a standard, an example to follo…..oh…hang on…. that would mean other farmers might have to make an effort, more than the bare minimum to keep the subsidy cheque coming in. That just to have their livestock in better nick and more townies in dry homes, what an outrageous idea! Thanks Dennis you’ve inspired me, this is a line of enquiry to pursue. https://www.woodlandtrust.org.uk/publications/2013/02/pontbren-project-sustainable-uplands-management/
White tailed eagle in Northants eh? That explains what I saw: I was down your road last (BGBW) weekend and thought I saw something very large with a white tail land on your garden fence for a moment. Did you manage to count it? ;o)
I understand that Harry is now persona non grata with the Royals: is this because Meghan has persuaded him against killing wildlife? Any Sandringham visiting Hen Harriers will be relieved.
As somebody who was actually present at the meeting, the comments of Mark Avery are although predictable but still don’t bear much relation to the actual meeting. He refers to the sensible Jake Fiennes and then goes onto make some sniping comments about the Royals. Were he to ask, he would have found out that Sandringham were listed as one of the 20 farmers in favour of the project. Where some people were surprised was when neighbouring farms were not consulted but they were happy to say that they had the backing of farms two counties away in Essex. One of the main issues was the alacrity of the project. The I.oW project is a 5 year project starting in 2019 but due to the covid restrictions last years efforts were quite curtailed so in essence it is only about a year old. People were asking would it not be better to see the results and ramifications of the project when they would have had a good amount of data, rather than making guesses based on one year only. Were the boot on the other foot i.e imagine if they had an otter cull in one small area, and then after only one year’s results began rolling it out over the country – Mark Avery would be howling from the roof tops – and quite rightly so. So why is it wrong to ask for a reasonable about of information to be gathered prior to any expansion? If the answer to that question is “no”, then why bother with any investigations? Personally I think by rushing into this project they are risking it being refused due to lack of scientific evidence when if they showed a little more patience then it might very well succeed.
William – I assume you are not a prince? You don’t sound the least bit princely. Thank you for your first comment here.
I’m signed up for the third webinar – always makes sense to get the most up to date info. See my blog today (Frioday) where the Telegraph break the news (exclusively) that Sandringham is signed up to the plan – I have welcomed that.