Brood meddling challenge – some more

Following on from this morning’s blog, here is the court order. I may get it framed and put it in the loo. You’ll see from this that the RSPB did not, in the end, apply for permission to appeal whereas I did and was turned down – this is entirely normal as one is asking the judges who made a judgment to grant permission for it to be appealed. They don’t often say yes. The Law is a strange place.

I can still decide whether to raise more funds and go to the Supreme Court. I’m interested in your views but I’m leaning towards not doing so. The wider context means that it ought, if anyone, to be the RSPB that follows this through to the bitter end – or the glorious victory – but they have decided not to do so.

Why does the RSPB have to cough up £10k whereas I ‘only’ have to find £5k? Because the RSPB is an organisation and I am a private individual. Remember, this case was started long before Wild Justice came into being.

For those interested in reading the full judgment – it’s not very long (despite taking over nine months to arrive), and it is fairly comprehensible to the lay person – click here.

I’ll be looking very carefully at the ‘science’ that NE gets out of this trial…

Photo: Gordon Yates


6 Replies to “Brood meddling challenge – some more”

  1. I don’t think that there is much benefit in trying to go to the supreme Court.
    I do like the idea of reviewing everything that this “trial” reveals. If NE had tagged every Harrier with decent equipment we would have good evidence that the trial provided zero increase in Hen Harrier numbers, I’m pretty sure, as well as other good science on the behavior of NE. I wonder if there might be a further legal opportunity at that point.

  2. If they believe they are morally right (i.e that brood meddling is a smokescreen and a sham) then the RSPB should continue the fight on all fronts and at all times – they are supposed to stand for these things -more so than butterflies and the like (and I am interested in protecting butterflies btw), plus they have the deep pockets. I just do not understand them as an organisation, I never did even when I was younger. I was very much pro-shooting and was involved in it – the good and the bad, I was a believer that all of the many ills of shooting were excusable and forgivable for the greater good of “preserving the countryside”, and I just took it for granted that the RSPB must have thought the same – as it seemed to me they did nothing very political against shooting, and the investigations side seemed far too thinly spread & undermanned to seriously deter anyone in relatively remote areas. These days it still seems to me that as an organisation they are still too (small c) conservative, too polite and just too plain risk averse. A bit like Keir Starmer – a very wise and decent man no doubt, but for god’s sake when your enemy are using every sly and dirty trick in the book you are entitled to get angry and to get a bit ruthless yourself.

  3. Take it to appeal, please. It wastes their time, and while they are dealing with you they cannot commit quite so many horrors as they would otherwise, and it prevents them crawling back into the shadows and covering things up quite as well as they would otherwise. Remember, the rightwingers and the anti-environmentalists use that exact tactic, because it works. You don’t have to win a single case to damage your opponent and their cause, you just have to make them fight tooth and nail to justify themselves in public.

    Just look at the profile of the people telling you to give up and jeering about waste of money, they wouldn’t be spending half that effort doing so if they were not worried about how things would go for them. They know that even if they win, they’d lose. So make them justify themselves to the bitter end. And yes, the RoyalSPB ought to be doing it, but the RoyalSPB is part of the establishment themselves.

  4. I have no strong views for whether to appeal or not. In my opinion losing along side the RSPB is probably more useful than winning. The RSPB is now 2 years into their 5 year deadline to see effective Driven Grouse Shooting licensing accompanied by effective monitoring and enforcement with the ultimate sanction to remove the facility to shoot grouse over an area of land where there is strong evidence of wildlife crimes occurring, and other measures to stop unsustainable management practices, before they call for a ban on driven grouse shooting.

    Natural England’s Brood meddling can only hasten the RSPB abandoning their position of supporting licensing as they continue to lose confidence in Natural England. I think now is the time, before Scotland announces how grouse shooting will be licensed, to push the RSPB to switch to supporting a ban in England.

    The Government’s failure to stop burning peatland, COP26 and the increase in climate awareness, the Met Office’s recent analysis that shows that future extreme rainfall could be more extreme than previously thought and the continued persecution of birds of prey all strengthen support for swift bold change.

    The time is ripe for the RSPB to weigh in and put real pressure on the Government and Natural England to act.

  5. Can I suggest a potential money raiser?

    Get the court order reproduced onto loo rolls. I’d buy a regular supply.

Comments are closed.