If the GWCT cannot conjure up a single scientific publication to support the 500m buffer zone for non-native gamebird releases near protected sites, and they can’t, then it seems that no-one can – read the Wild Justice blog here.
DEFRA is planning to consult on the #500mmyth next week along with other aspects of the clampdown on gamebird releasing. Sign up to the Wild Justice free newsletter for advice on how to respond to the consultation – click here.
[registration_form]
I rather wonder whether the 500 m buffer is influenced, if not based, on the similar (well identical) buffer for great crested newts (Triturus cristatus) when considering whether an activity (frequently development) can have a potential effect on the favourable conservation status of great crested newt populations?
The 500 m buffer (see pages 21, 22, 42 & 68) of the GCN Mitigation Guidelines available online (but no longer available on Natural England’s website, so one has to ‘travel’ to the Czech Republic: https://mokrady.wbs.cz/literatura_ke_stazeni/great_crested_newt_mitigation_guidelines.pdf), was established, as I recall, from actual science (Oldham & Humphries (2010) Herpetological Journal, 10: 183-190); and it is not a huge leap of faith, given the GCN’s notoriety and probable indelible insertion in to decision makers’ consciousness that, if as WJ avers, there is no other science, then 500 m may have simply leapt from, or was translocated so to speak, from the GCN Guidelines. Further, 500 m is a nice round number, half an OS grid square and thus visually as well as measurably convenient. A quick glance can roughly estimate 500 m on a 1:50,000 OS map.
I have argued here: https://markavery.info/2020/11/12/54912/, that there are other considerations too; and given that GCNs can move about the landscape up to 500 m from their natal pond quite easily, given they don’t have, and game birds do have, wings, a more mobile species could, not unreasonably have the potential to disperse frequently for a greater distance.
I would have thought that a few hundred decent satellite tags on pheasants could help elucidate their movements; and help inform the policy, such that we can have confidence on the requisite buffer.
“…given they don’t have, and game birds do have, wings, a more mobile species could, not unreasonably have the potential to disperse frequently for a greater distance”.
Pheasants have rather longer legs too!