The long-awaited JNCC report, “A Conservation Framework for Hen Harriers in the United Kingdom” has finally been “officially” released. The document was published on 17/02/2010 with members of the Scottish Parliament Rural Affairs and Environment Committee being sent a copy a few days prior to publication.
PDF of the full report here – http://www.jncc.gov.uk/pdf/jncc441.pdf
The report has hardly attracted the “big conservation media splash” that was first envisaged as the report had been leaked by The Sunday Herald some weeks ago. This leak was made amidst fears that SNH were dragging their heels with the publication due to pressure from pro-grouse shooting groups who would much rather see this report “buried” until the WANE Bill has passed through parliament.
As expected the grouse shooting lobby has attempted to rubbish the science behind the report and muddy the waters regarding the pitiful conservation status of hen harriers in the UK. The British Association for Conservation and Shooting (Scotland), the Scottish Countryside Alliance, the Scottish Gamekeepers Association, the Scottish Estates Business Group and the Scottish Rural Property and Business Association have written to the Minister for the Environment setting out their concerns about the report. It is understood that Scottish Raptor Study Groups have also written to the Rural Affairs and Environment Committee in support of the report.
It looks improbable that anything will be resolved in the near future regarding the plight of our most persecuted bird of prey. Pro-shooting groups must acknowledge the raptor persecution problem before any meaningful dialogue can be entered into and “trickle down” peer pressure make these abhorrent crimes unacceptable.
SNH Press release – http://www.snh.gov.uk/news-and-events/press-releases/press-release-details/index.jsp?id=458
JNCC Press release – http://www.jncc.gov.uk/page-5775
SRPBA Press release: http://srpba.com/view_item.aspx?item_id=4711&list_id=list1-218&list_index=12
Scottish Raptor Study Groups Press Release: http://www.scottishraptorgroups.org/news.php
Raptor Persecution UK 
In fairness to “the grouse shooting lobby”, there are genuine grounds for questioning the methodology and results of the harrier framework paper. So for the sake of completeness, here is what the Game & Wildlife Conservation Trust, the independent research and education charity, has said about the document:
SCOTLAND’S HARRIERS IN GOOD CONSERVATION STATUS BUT MORE WORK NEEDED TO RESOLVE CONFLICTS
GAME & Wildlife Conservation Trust’s (GWCT) review of the newly released Hen Harrier Framework has highlighted that, while Scotland’s harriers were nationally in favourable conservation status in 2004, distribution in some areas is poor.
The Trust also identifies that the scientific approach taken in this species framework needs further revision and the conservation approach for this species should be one of conflict resolution.
GWCT welcomed SNH’s recent offer to review the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) Hen Harrier Conservation Framework and although the review secured helpful revisions to the framework, GWCT’s scientists remain concerned about a number of themes.
The Trust feels that the broader moorland conservation requirements have not been balanced with raptor conservation, as is required in European law. We welcome SNH’s proposal of a prompt review of the framework and want to work with all the organisations involved to achieve a better distributed and resilient hen harrier population in the UK alongside grouse moor management, a valuable economic and conservation land use.
Areas of concern:
1. We are pleased to see that on the basis of the criteria selected by SNH and the report’s authors, Scotland’s hen harrier population was nationally in favourable conservation status in 2004. However two of the three criteria used to assess conservation status, at the level of individual Natural Heritage Zones, are flawed. The result is that no matter how high or low the harrier population size surveyed in 2004, application of the criteria would always have found that half the sites failed and half passed each test. This not a robust approach to assessing long term conservation status. It also remains a matter of concern that the framework has been published in the year following a national survey of harriers but without using these data.
2. The study reveals harriers are not evenly distributed across Scottish regions in relation to suitable habitat. Persecution is the focus for possible explanations of this distribution. Although we acknowledge the effects of persecution in some regions, more could have been done to explain the relative contributions of the many other factors affecting harriers, in particular golden eagle-harrier interactions, food supply and predation by foxes on nesting harriers.
3. The accuracy of the population estimates could have been improved by not assuming a standard occupancy rate in suitable habitat and using a finer scale habitat map; an earlier report revealed that the extent of land suitable for harriers in Scotland (at the fine scale) may be 26% (rather than 42-50% in the model). At that scale the potential population size may be 931 harriers, well below the published 1467-1790.
4. The report acknowledges that the complex interactions affecting harriers are already being explored by the UK’s hen harrier grouse management conflict resolution processes. The GWCT feels that this framework should have drawn more on these. Central to sustainable harrier conservation is the balance between maintaining heather moors, healthy food supplies and low fox predation pressure for harriers while allowing red grouse shooting to thrive and deliver these harrier requirements. These issues are recognised in the Langholm Moor Demonstration Project and Environment Council attempts to resolve the real conflict between hen harrier conservation and red grouse management.
Lazywell – would this be the same “independent research and education charity” that has accepted funding from Artemis Investment Management (founded by John Dodd of Glen Ogil Estate) and from another estate where a sea eagle and golden eagle were allegedly discovered in June 2010, both confirmed poisoned and is conducting a predator cull on behalf of the anti-raptor group Songbird Survival, and whose Scottish committee director has just been questioned regarding a dead sea eagle that was allegedly discovered on his estate but had mysteriously vanished when the police arrived to investigate? Not quite what I’d call “independent”. Formerly known as The Game Conservancy Trust, adding the words “Wildlife” and “Conservation” to their name ‘ain’t fooling anyone.
Ah, but you’re not challenging the integrity of its science, I take it?
Wrong again! The Hen Harrier Framework report is the latest in a very long line of scientific publications that demonstrate, unequivocally, the extent of illegal raptor persecution taking place across the UK and especially in Scotland. Here are a few examples of peer-reviewed science papers just for starters:
Etheridge et al. 1997. The effects of illegal killing and destruction of nests by humans on the population dynamics of the hen harrier in Scotland. Journal of Aplied Ecology.
Stott. 1998. Hen harrier breeding success on English grouse moors. British Birds.
Whitfield et al. 2003. The association of grouse moor in Scotland with the illegal use of poisons to control predators. Biological Conservation.
Marquiss et al. 2003. Contrasting population trends of the northern goshawk in the Scottish/English Borders and North-East Scotland. Birds of Prey in a Changing Environment.
Hardey et al. 2003. Variation in breeding success of inland peregrine falcon in three regions of Scotland 1991-2000. Birds of Prey in a Changing Environment.
Summers et al. 2003. Changes in hen harrier numbers in relation to grouse moor management. Birds of Prey in a Changing Environment.
Whitfield et al. 2004. Modelling the effects of persecution on the population dynamics of golden eagles in Scotland. Biological Conservation.
Sim et al. 2007. Status of the hen harrier in the UK and the Isle of Man in 2004, and a comparison with the 1988/89 surveys. Bird Study.
Whitfield et al. 2007. Factors constraining the distribution of golden eagles in Scotland. Bird Study.
Smart et al. 2010. Illegal killing slows population recovery of a re-introduced raptor of high conservation concern – the red kite. Biological Conservation.
Need I continue? All these papers demonstrate that populations of hen harriers, goshawks, golden eagles, peregrines and red kites are severely constrained in parts of the UK as a direct result of the illegal persecution taking place on shooting estates.
We can argue about the pros and cons of all the different scientific methods available to assess these impacts, but the bottom line is that the results will be the same, no matter which method is chosen. THE ILLEGAL PERSECUTION OF RAPTORS ON SHOOTING ESTATES ACROSS THE UK IS WIDESPREAD AND IS AFFECTING THE POPULATION STATUS OF THESE SPECIES.
Ps. Lazywell – I note from your email address that you yourself have strong links to the GWCT! I also note that your shooting estate was recently listed as “one of the finest in Scotland” by a magazine that also listed Glenogil Estate and Raeshaw Estate in the same category. I wonder what methods were used to make these assessments and whether you were satisfied with the outcome?
You have the advantage in one respect, in that I don’t know who you are…
The GWCT has never challenged the fact that illegal persecution takes place. But at the same time it has recognised that there is a genuine conservation conflict and has been at the forefront of trying to resolve it. Just a few examples: (1). The Joint Raptor Study (Langholm 1) was an essential first step in the process by identifying scientifically the acute and catastrophic impact that hen harriers could have on a grouse population, with all the economic consequences that ensued; until then the respective arguments had been based on anecdotal evidence, however authoritative, or emotion. (2). The GWCT has long proposed some kind of regional ceiling of harrier numbers (nb Dick Potts’s own framework in Ibis), an idea which has been rehearsed more recently by Steve Redpath, than whom it would be difficult to find a more independent scientist (as well as formidable raptor ecologist). Incidentally, such an approach, if implemented, would unquestionably result in a significant increase in the number of harriers; that has never been challenged by the RSPB, nor by any other reputable conservation body. (3). The role of the GWCT was pivotal in breaking the logjam and facilitating Langholm 2, which is a vital exercise in exploring solutions on the ground. (4). Meanwhile the GWCT is one of the principal participants in the conflict resolution process conceived by Natural England and being coordinated by the Environment Council.
The GWCT’s fundamental position is that the status quo is unsustainable, and that some kind of managed solution is both desirable and inevitable. That’s my position too, and I would suggest it is shared by the majority of senior raptor ecologists (although some of them cannot express it publicly).
As for my own shoot, yes, those lists are very silly but quite flattering. The methodology was wholly subjective – indeed the guy who wrote the piece had never even been. But having written it he asked if he could!
Well we at least agree on two things – illegal raptor persecution takes place and the status quo is unsustainable. I have to disagree with most of your other points though.
In many people’s view, including mine, Langholm 1 & Langholm 2 is a colossal waste of tax-payer’s money. It’s not as simple as saying harriers could cause a catastrophic decline of red grouse (a line often used by the anti-harrier brigade) – there are other contributing factors, such as mammalian predator control, ticks and habitat quality relating to land-management practices. The Glen Tanar Estate is already demonstrating that hen harriers and driven grouse shooting can co-exist (a story previously reported on this blog) without the need for illegal persecution or ‘legal removal’ of harriers. The diversionary feeding of harriers on that estate is effectively the same principle being used at Langholm 2, just without the £ multi-million price tag.
Steve Redpath’s suggestion for a ‘ceiling’ on hen harrier numbers was met with utter derision by many senior raptor ecologists. How on earth can this be a consideration when harriers are not in favourable conservation status? It would also set a dangerous precedent for the ‘legal removal’ of other predators, such as the golden eagle, goshawk, red kite, peregrine – all species that are currently severely constrained by illegal persecution. Where do you propose the ‘legally removed’ harriers are moved to? Redpath suggested Exmoor – conveniently empty of harriers. Why do you think that is? England has an even worse record for harrier persecution than Scotland – do you honestly think that removing Scottish harriers into England is a workable solution? Or is it a case of NIMBY-ism?
I’m afraid that until the game-shooting lobby accepts the EXTENT of illegal raptor persecution, and the impact it is having on our natural heritage, and actually tries to do something practical about it (as opposed to releasing media soundbites about how its just a few rogues and is being exaggerated), then progress will not be made. I’m genuinely pleased that you have taken the time to express your views – I hope you can use your considerable influence to crackdown on the many estates that still carry out these disgraceful practices. GWCT would be viewed as being much more credible if they stopped accepting funding from certain quarters and publicly distanced themselves from the criminals.
BTW – it doesn’t really matter who I am, but seeing as you asked – I am one of a group of concerned, independent individuals who maintain this blog. We are not affiliated with any conservation group – indeed we have been critical of several of them when we felt it was justified. Neither are we anti-shooting per se – several members of our group are game shooters. What we do oppose is the on-going criminal activities of what we consider a majority in this industry and we set up this blog to draw attention to these crimes. We have been blogging for almost a year now, and given the number of hits our website has received, and our diverse mix of subscribers from both home and abroad, it seems the general public shares our interest and concern.
We have all heard before that the so called conflict is due to the fact that under some circumstances harriers reduce red grouse to the point that shooting is non viable. However we rarely here an acceptance of the undoubted fact that RED GROUSE MANAGEMENT IS CATASTROPHIC FOR HEN HARRIERS. Here in England we should have in the region of 300 pairs of harriers on grouse moors yet we have but ONE, yet still the CA, GCWT, Moorland owners and NGO still talk about a conflict because of too many harriers. The Redpath proposals would give us more birds in England and God knows we need them but the real answer to the game lobby is if you want a co-operative approach to problem solving a real willingness to tackle persecution would be a good start. The only indicator of that would be more harriers, an end to winter persecution, which is where the real damage is done and if you don’t want the mud to stick start weeding out the real villains, we all know who they are! Then and only then will we really start to take you seriously Lazywell.
Paul Irving
The bottom line here is It is ileagle to kill birds of prey, therefore it is a criminal offence. [ weather for the good of grouse or not “who will be shot anyway” ] and should be dealt with as such with no questions asked if you can do the crime you can do the time end of…………..