3 thoughts on “BBC Radio 4 discusses raptor persecution, today at 11am”
OK..just listened to the programme on playback…not a bad precis of the present situation…however…the one thing that was not presented, particularly by the scientists, was the idea of changes to methods of shooting.Grouse moors are a result of a Victorian view of the countryside and the “management” of grouse to ridiculously high numbers is what has and still is causing the imbalances in the uplands; the release of 35 million pheasants annually is what causes imbalances in lowland areas. Not the raptors.
The “strong leadership” suggested should take account of the views of the general public – massively in favour of raptor protection – and make sure that shooting fits in with wildlife and not as at present [even in the utterances of scientists] the other way around.
Ban driven grouse shooting and replace it with “walked up shooting” of low densities of expensive red grouse.
The only quota that should be permitted is a quota on release of pheasants and red legged partridges.
That makes sense.
There is a pheasant shoot near to where I reside. In addition to the pheasants that breed in the wild (whose eggs provide a feast for crows) 3,500 poults are brought in and eventually released from the pens when they can fly into the trees to roost. The total season bag from shooting is about 1500. So what happens to the remaining 2000 ?
In addition to the large numbers of pheasants put on the ground (which effectively amounts to a pollution) gamekeepers attempt to eliminate any creature that may pose a threat to a pheasant. Apart from the obvious ones that we all know about, the likes of stoats and weasels are trapped.
That sort of activity just has to have a detrimental effect on the balance of nature. Science is not necessary to prove that. It is basic common sense.
I have no objection to shooting but, like Dave, would wish it limited to the walk up variety. I believe there is something wrong with the mindset of people who want to kill in large numbers by firing at masses of flying birds. I cannot comprehend why anyone needs to shoot large numbers of anything to gain enjoyment from their sport.
To talk about “quotas” of raptors is very dangerous, even if we are referring to the distant future. If we are to talk about any quotas or control at all then it surely must always be in reference to the quota of numbers for non-native birds released, devastating local habitat, or control of those who insist on intensive methods of land management, which again has a significant and damaging impact on the local fauna and flora. We should laugh in the face of anybody who even suggests slaughter of raptors, now or in the future. What a sad day it would be when we find ourselves legally shooting birds of prey out of the skies, destroying eggs and nests, or even capturing wild raptors and forcing them into captivity and all for what? So the Government can appease a minority group of people who demand that they get what they want, whatever the cost. Give them an inch……
Today’s BBC Radio 4 ‘Saving Species’ programme will be discussing raptor persecution at 11am today.
Raptor Persecution UK 
OK..just listened to the programme on playback…not a bad precis of the present situation…however…the one thing that was not presented, particularly by the scientists, was the idea of changes to methods of shooting.Grouse moors are a result of a Victorian view of the countryside and the “management” of grouse to ridiculously high numbers is what has and still is causing the imbalances in the uplands; the release of 35 million pheasants annually is what causes imbalances in lowland areas. Not the raptors.
The “strong leadership” suggested should take account of the views of the general public – massively in favour of raptor protection – and make sure that shooting fits in with wildlife and not as at present [even in the utterances of scientists] the other way around.
Ban driven grouse shooting and replace it with “walked up shooting” of low densities of expensive red grouse.
The only quota that should be permitted is a quota on release of pheasants and red legged partridges.
That makes sense.
There is a pheasant shoot near to where I reside. In addition to the pheasants that breed in the wild (whose eggs provide a feast for crows) 3,500 poults are brought in and eventually released from the pens when they can fly into the trees to roost. The total season bag from shooting is about 1500. So what happens to the remaining 2000 ?
In addition to the large numbers of pheasants put on the ground (which effectively amounts to a pollution) gamekeepers attempt to eliminate any creature that may pose a threat to a pheasant. Apart from the obvious ones that we all know about, the likes of stoats and weasels are trapped.
That sort of activity just has to have a detrimental effect on the balance of nature. Science is not necessary to prove that. It is basic common sense.
I have no objection to shooting but, like Dave, would wish it limited to the walk up variety. I believe there is something wrong with the mindset of people who want to kill in large numbers by firing at masses of flying birds. I cannot comprehend why anyone needs to shoot large numbers of anything to gain enjoyment from their sport.
To talk about “quotas” of raptors is very dangerous, even if we are referring to the distant future. If we are to talk about any quotas or control at all then it surely must always be in reference to the quota of numbers for non-native birds released, devastating local habitat, or control of those who insist on intensive methods of land management, which again has a significant and damaging impact on the local fauna and flora. We should laugh in the face of anybody who even suggests slaughter of raptors, now or in the future. What a sad day it would be when we find ourselves legally shooting birds of prey out of the skies, destroying eggs and nests, or even capturing wild raptors and forcing them into captivity and all for what? So the Government can appease a minority group of people who demand that they get what they want, whatever the cost. Give them an inch……