Month: November 2017

Concerns about toxic lead ammunition “nonsense” according to Botham

A few weeks ago Ian Botham featured in an article published by The Times, in which it was reported Botham had accused the RSPB of being “dishonest” (see here).

The Times article was apparently based on an interview that Botham had done with the Shooting Gazette. Thanks to one of our blog readers, we now have a PDF copy of that Shooting Gazette interview:

Shooting Gazette Nov 17 Ian Botham Article

It’s well worth a read to find out Botham’s views on what changes he would make to the RSPB and how the You Forgot the Birds campaign will “never stop“.

But the question and answer we were most interested in was this:

Shooting Gazette question: Are there any issues about shooting in the UK that concern you?

Botham’s answer: “One of the things that needs to be looked at is the nonsense about lead [ammunition]. It’s been blown totally out of proportion“.

Unfortunately, Botham doesn’t identify which part of the vast expanse of scientific evidence about the danger of toxic lead to humans, wildlife & the environment he thinks is “nonsense”.

Perhaps its the findings of this eminent group of international scientific professors and researchers?

Perhaps its the findings of this eminent group of international scientific researchers?

Perhaps its the findings of this eminent group of scientific researchers?

Perhaps its the findings of the international scientific experts who contributed to the Oxford Lead Symposium?

Perhaps its the findings of the Lead Ammunition Group?

Perhaps its the advice of the Food Standards Agency?

Perhaps its the guidelines of Fareshare?

Perhaps its the findings of the European Food Safety Authority?

Hmm. Should we believe the evidence of hundreds of scientific experts, including The Lord Krebs kt, MA, DPhil, FRS, FMedSci, Hon DSc, or should we believe the opinion of the King of Bollocks?

It’s a tricky one.

Scot Gov’s grouse moor management review: Chair announcement imminent

It looks like the Scottish Government is about to announce the Chair and members of the much-anticipated independent review group that will be tasked with considering the environmental impacts of grouse moor management techniques and to recommend options for regulation, including licensing.

Back in October 2017, the Scottish Parliament’s Environment Committee agreed to write to Environment Cabinet Secretary Roseanna Cunningham to ask for an update on the establishment of this review group, which had first been announced on 31 May 2017. They asked her to respond by 10 November 2017.

Last Friday (10 Nov), the following letter was published on the Environment Committee’s website:

The Cabinet Secretary told the Committee, “I can inform you that I expect to announce the chair and members of the group within the next couple of weeks“. We groaned a little bit, thinking we’d have to wait until late November for this announcement, but then we noticed the date of Roseanna’s letter: 1 November 2017.

That means we can expect this announcement either today (13th) or tomorrow (14th), if she keeps to her word.

UPDATE: 20 November 2017: Scottish Government dragging its feet on grouse moor management review (here)

More crayons than credibility at GWCT HQ

The Game & Wildlife Conservation Trust (GWCT) has responded to the publication of the RSPB’s 2016 Birdcrime report with an extraordinary blog, attributed to Director of Communications, Andrew Gilruth.

Read it here.

Someone’s been busy with the crayons, creating a bizarre graph showing the number of incidents reported to the RSPB, but totally ignoring the main graph in the Birdcrime report which shows an increasing long-term trend in the number of confirmed raptor persecution incidents.

GWCT graph:

Actual graph from RSPB’s Birdcrime report:

And clearly, Andrew was so busy with his colouring crayons that he lost concentration for a while and mis-read the number of confirmed incidents of bird of prey persecution in 2016 (which was 81) and instead wrote, “The RSPB report reveals that there were 46 confirmed incidents involving birds of prey & owls last year“.

He then goes on to misrepresent the objectives of the Langholm Project (and is taken to task by the RSPB’s Duncan Orr-Ewing in the comments section below the blog) and then talks about how GWCT is working to understand “what management approaches, including additional licensed management, would lead to less crime“. What he means by ‘additional licensed management’ probably isn’t the introduction of a regulatory system to licence game shoots; he’s probably talking about getting licences that would allow gamekeepers to kill raptors, which has been a long-held ambition of the GWCT (e.g. see here)

We shouldn’t really be surprised by the GWCT’s response to the Birdcrime report; GWCT has, in our opinion, moved so far away from being a recognisably credible and respected scientific organisation that we don’t expect anything but spin these days. However, this latest response just serves to isolate the GWCT even further, especially with the recent outpouring of condemnation of illegal raptor persecution from authorities like the Yorkshire Dales National Park Authority (here), Nidderdale AONB (here), Peak District National Park Authority (here) and the Forest of Bowland AONB (here). Even the British Association of Shooting & Conservation (BASC) has acknowledged that raptor persecution is game-shooting industry-driven problem (here), which leaves GWCT lagging well behind.

Still, credit where it’s due, the GWCT is helping the economy by maintaining jobs in the crayon manufactoring industry.

Buzzard shot in Barnsley: South Yorks Police abandons case, RSPB appeals for info

RSPB press statement:

Buzzard shot in Barnsley sparks investigation

A buzzard found illegally shot in a wood near Barnsley has prompted concern by the RSPB and police.

A local birder saw the bird fall out of a tree in Warren Wood, Stainborough on 9 August and reported it to the RSPB’s Investigations unit (crime@rspb.org.uk). An RSPB investigator recovered the bird and it was taken for an X-ray. The X-ray identified a broken wing and a shotgun pellet lodged in the wing, which was deemed to have caused the break.

The wound was thought to be several days old and had become infected, so sadly the bird had to be euthanized.

It is illegal to intentionally kill or harm any bird of prey, which are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. To kill or injure one is a criminal offence and could result in an unlimited fine or up to six months in jail.

The incident was reported to police immediately, and last week the RSPB was informed that the enquiry had concluded with no prosecution. The RSPB is now appealing to the public for information.

The RSPB’s recent Birdcrime report, published on 1 November 2017, revealed that the illegal shooting, trapping and poisoning of birds of prey is a big problem in Yorkshire. Last year the RSPB received reports of 153 incidents of wild bird crime in the North England Region: this was 33% of the total incidents for the UK and the highest number for any region. 10 of these occurred in South Yorkshire, and many more are suspected to have taken place unseen and undetected. The report also revealed that there were no prosecutions for bird of prey persecution in the whole of 2016.

David Hunt, RSPB Investigations Officer, recovered the body.

David said: “It is sickening to think that this bird was deliberately shot. Seeing a buzzard soaring high in the sky or picking up worms from a freshly-turned field is part of the joy of a walk in the countryside. However majestic birds like these are, more often than people realise, being intentionally and brutally killed in Yorkshire, and is a cause for local concern. This is not the first time I have been called out to a case like this and unfortunately it is often very hard to find out who is responsible. If you do have information, please come forward.”

The RSPB is offering a £1,000 reward for information that leads to a successful conviction. If you have any information relating to this incident, call South Yorkshire Police on 101 quoting reference number 617 10082017.

ENDS

Warren Wood, where the injured buzzard was found is within the grounds of Stainborough Park and Wentworth Castle. Warren Wood forms part of Broom Royd Wood (see point 8 on this map) where visitors are encouraged to “visit in spring for a beautiful display of bluebells“.

Wentworth Castle and its parkland was open to the public but now appears to have closed to visitors, according to the website.

What’s really interesting about this case though is how South Yorkshire Police have responded to it. The RSPB press statement says the “incident was reported to the police immediately“, which presumably means on 9th August 2017 when the bird was found. And yet now South Yorkshire Police have told the RSPB that the enquiry has concluded and there’ll be no prosecution.

So how come South Yorkshire Police didn’t launch a public appeal for information back in August? How come the Police enquiry ‘has concluded’ without asking for the public’s help to identify a suspect? That’s pathetic, and only serves to highlight the importance of reporting suspected raptor persecution crimes to the RSPB as well as to the Police. Had the RSPB not been informed about this particular crime, we’d all be none the wiser and the crime probably wouldn’t have made it on to the ‘official’ list of reported wildlife crimes.

Well done RSPB for keeping the public informed.

UPDATE 14.50hrs:

South Yorkshire Police haven’t got a clue. This has just appeared on Twitter:

Chair of Bowland AONB condemns illegal raptor persecution

Following the recent publication of the RSPB’s 2016 Birdcrime report, it has been very encouraging to see a steady stream of public statements of condemnation of illegal raptor persecution from various organisations that previously have been pretty quiet on the subject, unless prodded with a large stick. This is indicative of increased public awareness of the issue, and subsequent public pressure demanding change.

First there was the Yorkshire Dales National Park Authority (here), then the Chair of the Nidderdale Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) (here), then the Peak District National Park Authority (here), and now the Chair of the Forest of Bowland AONB has joined in:

Statement on Persecution of Birds of Prey

7 November 2017

The Forest of Bowland AONB is an important area for the birds of prey that we associate with the English uplands, such as hen harrier, peregrine, merlin and short-eared owls.  However, the RSPB Birdcrime Report 2016 published last week highlights how some of these iconic species continue to be the subject of illegal acts of persecution throughout much of England and particularly the northern uplands.

The Chair of the Forest of Bowland AONB Joint Advisory Committee, County Councillor Albert Atkinson stated:

“It is particularly concerning to the Committee that these acts of illegal persecution continue; badly affecting the populations of birds of prey that are synonymous with the Forest of Bowland. These acts undoubtedly have an impact on the reputation of Bowland as an ‘Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty’.   The Committee unreservedly condemns all illegal persecution of birds of prey.  The AONB will continue to work closely with landowners, the police, RSPB and Natural England to help protect and conserve birds of prey across the area.”

If you wish to report any crimes against wild birds, we would suggest contacting the police by calling 101.

ENDS

We don’t remember ever seeing a public statement on this issue from the Forest of Bowland AONB, despite this being an area notorious for illegal raptor persecution.

Bowland AONB sign, as adapted by Mark Avery

And yes, we have been critical of the actual content of some of these recent public statements (e.g. see here and here), but we’re not going to criticise the intention behind the statements, nor the fact that these statements have been published on these organisations’ respective websites. By announcing these statements on the National Park and AONB websites, the messages of condemnation will reach a wide audience, including many who may previously have been unaware that illegal raptor persecution was even a ‘thing’, let alone a ‘thing’ going on inside these supposedly protected areas.

Well done, Cllr Albert Atkinson of the Forest of Bowland AONB. There’s still a LOT more to do at Bowland, and it will need more than just words, but this is an excellent start.

Peak District National Park Authority responds to RSPB’s 2016 Birdcrime report

The Peak District National Park Authority has issued a statement in reponse to the publication of the RSPB’s 2016 Birdcrime report.

Sarah Fowler, chief executive of the Peak District National Park, said: “Killing birds of prey is illegal. I am appalled by the persecution of any protected species, no matter what the circumstances.

The RSPB’s latest Birdcrime report brings the plight of birds of prey to the fore. It shows what we are up against in trying to reverse the fortunes of birds of prey. I welcome the recent acknowledgement from shooting organisations that the killing of raptors to protect game birds is part of the problem. It is – and it is damaging to their interests. I welcome and wholeheartedly support their condemnation of such activity.

Being able to watch birds of prey in the Peak District National Park should be part of everyone’s experience.

We have been working with landowners, gamekeepers and partners since 2011 to remedy the situation locally but it is clear from the results that much more needs to be done.

This year peregrines have failed to breed in the Dark Peak for the first time since they recolonised in 1984 and persecution of these incredible birds has been a factor in this. This has to change.

It is incredibly difficult to catch someone in the act or to collect evidence and make a case for prosecution. I appeal to all users of the countryside to help us bring persecution to an end by reporting anything you feel is suspicious to the police. The best hope we have is for law-abiding people within the game bird industry calling out those who operate outside the law.

The Peak District Birds of Prey Initiative will shortly be publishing a report documenting the fortunes of key birds of prey alongside confirmed or suspected incidents of persecution in the moorland areas of the Peak District during 2016 and 2017. On the back of this report, I will look for a renewed commitment from moorland owners and managers in the Peak District to work with us to reverse the fortunes of birds of prey – and a strengthening of this commitment. We cannot achieve this on our own.”

Anyone with information to report about wildlife crime should contact Derbyshire Police on 101 or Crimestoppers on 0800 555111.

ENDS

Photo of an osprey found in the Peak District National Park in September 2015. It had two broken legs and succumbed to these injuries soon after being found. The post-mortem stated its injuries were consistent with being caught in a spring trap (Photo by RSPB)

It’s good to see strong condemnation of continued illegal raptor persecution from the Peak District National Park Authority, although, coming a week after the publication of the Birdcrime report it does have a whiff of ‘Oh God, everyone else has commented, we’d better say something too’. Nevertheless, better late than never.

We also appreciate Sarah Fowler’s acknowledgement that the 7-year-long Peak District Bird of Prey Initiative has been a complete and utter failure. She didn’t actually say that – she said, “It is clear from the results that much more needs to be done“, and, with the imminent publication of the Initiative’s 2016 and 2017 annual reports, she said “I will look for a renewed commitment from moorland owners and managers in the Peak District to work with us to reverse the fortunes of birds of prey – and a strengthening of this commitment“.

Hang on. Wasn’t ‘renewed commitment’ from project partners promised in 2015 when the Initiative’s five-year targets had all failed to be met? Ah yes, so it was. And yet, despite that ‘renewed commitment’ we’ve seen continued evidence of illegal raptor persecution within the National Park and now we learn that “This year peregrines have failed to breed in the Dark Peak for the first time since they recolonised in 1984 and persecution of these incredible birds has been a factor in this“.

We don’t want ‘renewed commitment’ from so-called project partners. It’s meaningless bollocks that nobody believes anymore. We’re sick of hearing it and sick of statutory agencies using it to pretend that everything’s going to be ok.

The Peak District National Park Authority needs to start calling out these grouse moor owners, managers and agents, by name, instead of shielding them and their criminal activities within this charade of partnership-working.

General Licence restriction – the Raeshaw Estate fiasco continues…

Good grief. Just when you thought this pantomime couldn’t get any more ridiculous….

As many of you will know, Raeshaw Estate in the Scottish Borders was one of the first in Scotland to be subjected to a General Licence restriction, issued in 2015, based on clear police evidence that wildlife crimes had been committed although there was insufficient evidence to prosecute any individual (see here). The estate contested the legality of SNH’s decision and this was seen as a test case, which went to Judicial Review in 2016. In March this year, the Court of Session upheld SNH’s decision and the General Licence restriction was considered lawful (here).

Here is a map showing the location of Raeshaw Estate, near Heriot in south Scotland (estate boundary details sourced from Andy Wightman’s Who Owns Scotland website).

For background, there’s been a long history of raptor persecution “nr Heriot“, dating back to at least 2001. Here’s a list we’ve compiled of confirmed raptor persecution crimes, listed in RSPB annual reports and / or the press:

2001 May: poisoned buzzard (Carbofuran) “Heriot Dale”. No prosecution

2003 Feb: poisoned buzzard (Carbofuran) “Heriot”. No prosecution

2003 Mar: poisoned buzzard (Carbofuran) “Heriot”. No prosecution

2003 Apr: poisoned buzzard (Carbofuran) “Heriot”. No prosecution

2003 Nov: poisoned buzzard (Carbofuran) “Heriot”. No prosecution

2004 Feb: Carbofuran (possession for use) “Heriot”. No prosecution

2004 Feb: two poisoned buzzards (Carbofuran) “Heriot”. No prosecution

2004 Oct: poisoned buzzard (Carbofuran) “Heriot”. No prosecution

2005 Dec: poisoned buzzard & raven (Carbofuran) “Heriot”. No prosecution

2006 Sep: poisoned buzzard (Carbofuran) “Heriot”. No prosecution

2006 Oct: poisoned buzzard (Carbofuran) “Heriot”. No prosecution

2009 Mar: two poisoned buzzards (Carbofuran) “nr Heriot”. No prosecution

2009 Jun: poisoned red kite (Carbofuran) “nr Heriot”. No prosecution

2009 Jun: 4 x poisoned baits (2 x rabbits; 2 x pigeons) (Carbofuran) “nr Heriot”. No prosecution

2010 Nov: poisoned buzzard (Carbofuran) “nr Heriot”. No prosecution

2011 Jan: poisoned buzzard (Carbofuran) “nr Heriot” No prosecution

2013 Jun: shot + poisoned buzzard (Carbofuran) “nr Heriot”. No prosecution

2014 May: crow trap baited with two live pigeon decoys “nr Heriot”. No prosecution (but General Licence restriction applied in Nov 2015)

2014 May: four set spring traps beside live pigeon decoy “nr Heriot”. No prosecution (but General Licence restriction applied in Nov 2015)

2014 May: four shot buzzards “nr Heriot” No prosecution

2015 Jul: shot buzzard “found by side of road between Heriot and Innerleithen” according to media reports (see here). No prosecution

Interestingly, also not included in the RSPB’s annual reports but reported by the Southern Reporter (here) and the Guardian (here), a police raid on Raeshaw Estate in 2004 uncovered nine dead birds of prey, including five barn owls, two buzzards, a kestrel and a tawny owl, described as being “poisoned or shot“. In addition, “a number of illegal poisons were discovered but no-one was ever prosecuted“. According to both these articles, during a further police raid on Raeshaw Estate in 2009 ‘three injured hunting dogs were seized by the SSPCA on suspicion of involvement with badger baiting’. We don’t know whether that resulted in a prosecution.

Also not included in the above list is the sudden ‘disappearance’ of a young satellite-tagged hen harrier in October 2011. This bird had fledged from Langholm and it’s last known signal came from Raeshaw Estate. A search failed to find the body or the tag.

Raeshaw Estate (photo by RPUK)

Once the General Licence restriction was in place in 2015, Raeshaw Estate applied for, and was granted, a number of individual licences, allowing them to continue to carry out various ‘management’ activities (killing corvids and other so-called ‘pest’ species) but under closer scrutiny than they would have been subjected to under the General Licence. We know that between July and August 2016, at least 1,000 birds (294 rooks, 706 jackdaws) were lawfully killed under the auspices of these individual licences (see here). It looked like business as usual for this grouse-shooting estate, even with a General Licence restriction in place.

In 2017 Raeshaw Estate successfully applied for more individual licences that would allow them to continue this lawful wildlife-killing spree. However, in May 2017 after a spot check on the estate by SNH staff, SNH announced it had revoked an individual licence on Raeshaw Estate following the discovery that the terms of the individual licence had allegedly been breached (see here). SNH also reported suspected wildlife crimes to Police Scotland; we await news on this.

Good, we thought. The General Licence restriction was still in place (until Nov 2018) and now the individual licence had been revoked, so we assumed, naively, that Raeshaw Estate would no longer be permitted to kill wild birds during this period.

How wrong we were.

In early October 2017 we submitted an FoI to SNH to ask a series of questions about this issue. Amongst other things, we wanted to know for how long the individual licence had been revoked, and we also wanted to know whether the Estate’s General Licence restriction would be extended beyond the initial three-year period (Nov 2015-Nov 2018) given that further alleged breaches, and suspected wildlife crimes, had been discovered. SNH’s framework for dealing with General Licence restrictions explicitly states that a restriction may be extended in these circumstances:

“Where, during a period of restriction, new evidence is received by SNH which provides reason to believe that wild birds have been killed and / or taken, there is intention to do so, other than in accordance with the terms of a Licence and the Licensing manager considers that the existing restriction should be extended, the Licensing Manager will recommend to the Wildlife Operations Manager that the existing restriction be extended“.

Well, guess what? Raeshaw Estate’s original General Licence restriction has NOT been extended – why the hell not?

And even more jaw-dropping, it turns out that even though SNH has revoked one individual licence, Raeshaw Estate can simply apply for another one, and another one, and another one, ad infinitum!!!

Here’s SNH’s response to our FoI:

How on earth is this allowed to go on?

It could be argued that SNH is simply following the General Restriction framework guidelines (in terms of considering further individual licence applications), and we have some sympathy with that, but, presumably SNH was involved in the drafting of these guidelines and even if they hadn’t noticed this glaring loophole at the time of drafting, it’s surely apparent now and SNH should be pushing for an urgent revision. And it does not explain why SNH has not extended Raeshaw Estate’s original General Licence restriction. If SNH has identified alleged breaches that were considered sufficient evidence to result in a revocation of an individual licence, why are these alleged breaches not considered sufficient evidence to extend the original General Licence restriction, as per the SNH guidelines?

It could also be argued that even though Raeshaw Estate is allowed to apply for as many individual licences as it likes (despite these repeated alleged licence breaches and alleged wildlife crimes), SNH may refuse to grant any more. We do know, from correspondence between Raeshaw Estate’s lawyer and SNH, released as part of our FoI resonse, that Raeshaw Estate was planning to submit another individual licence application “for 3 cage traps in order to control rooks in particular which were spoiling feeders for pheasants“. We have submitted another FoI to determine whether SNH has granted any further individual licences, even though there is yet another on-going criminal police investigation in to alleged wildlife crimes on this estate.

Watch this space.

Northern England Raptor Forum (NERF) responds to RSPB’s Birdcrime 2016 report

The Northern England Raptor Forum (NERF) has just published its response to the publication of the RSPB’s Birdcrime 2016 report.

Read it here

NERF’s unreserved condemnation of the continued illegal killing of birds of prey is everything you would expect from an organisation that works at the frontline of raptor conservation. In addition, NERF welcomes the recent statements of condemnation from senior representatives of the Yorkshire Dales National Park Authority (here) and the Nidderdale Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (here). NERF is particularly appreciative of the frank admission and call for a halt to the illegal killing from BASC’s acting CEO, Christopher Graffius (here).

Incidentally, there are still places available to attend NERF’s annual conference on 18 November 2017, at Northumbria University (City Campus East) in Newcastle. Programme & booking details here.

Costs/benefits study of driven grouse shooting due to begin spring 2018

In September 2017 the Scottish Parliament’s Public Petitions Committee considered petition # PE01633, submitted by Les Wallace, calling on the Scottish Government to sponsor a comprehensive and independent study into the full economic impacts of driven grouse shooting.

The Petitions Committee agreed that a full independent study was needed but was unsure whether this topic would be covered as part of the Scottish Government’s earlier commitment in May to undertake a review of grouse moor management practices.

There was also confusion as to whether the Scottish Government had actually commissioned this research yet, and the Committee agreed to contact the Scottish Government to ask for an update on progress and to ask for a timescale (e.g. start / finish date) of that proposed work.

The Scottish Government has now responded to the Petitions Committee with this:

It’s our understanding that this commissioned research on the economic and biodiversity costs/benefits of driven grouse shooting (and other types of upland land use) is separate to the other main piece of work announced by Roseanna Cunningham five months ago in May 2017 – that being ‘to set up an independently-led group to look at the environmental impact of grouse moor management practices such as muirburn, the use of medicated grit and mountain hare culls, and to recommend options for regulation including licensing and other measures which could be put in place without new primary legislation‘.

We are expecting details of this independently-led environmental impact review group to be announced by Friday 10th November, as requested by the Scottish Parliament’s Environment Committee last month.

SNH refuses to disclose details of individual General Licence restriction

In September 2017 we learned that SNH had imposed a General Licence restriction on an individual for alleged criminal activity in relation to raptor persecution (see here).

This was a highly unusual restriction because it applied to an individual rather than to an estate.

At the time the restriction was announced, SNH provided virtually no information other than to say a General Licence restriction had been imposed and that it would apply for three years.

However, RSPB Scotland released a press statement in relation to this restriction order which included the following quote from RSPB Scotland’s Head of Investigations, Ian Thomson:

The restriction was imposed after RSPB investigations staff passed video footage to police of a gamekeeper allegedly setting illegal traps, baited with a dead woodpigeon, very close to a goshawk nest in NE Scotland”.

Here’s a clip from that video evidence:

From this, we were able to deduce that this alleged wildlife crime took place in March 2014 ‘nr Tarland, Aberdeenshire’, although the specific location was not given.

This alleged offence was reported by Police Scotland to the Crown Office in April 2014 (see here). It is clear, now, that the Crown Office did not prosecute the gamekeeper, probably on the grounds that the video evidence was deemed ‘inadmissible’. That’s the sixth alleged wildlife crime case, that we know about, that the Crown Office has dropped in recent months.

So at this stage we know that an alleged wildlife crime had taken place, we know that a criminal prosecution is not going to happen (because the case is now time-barred), and we know that SNH has imposed an individual General Licence restriction on a gamekeeper as a supposed sanction. The identity of the alleged offender remains a secret, as does the name of the estate where the alleged offence was committed. This lack of transparency is, frankly, appalling, especially when former Environment Minister Paul Wheelhouse had stated when he first introduced General Licence restrictions in 2014 that he expected them to function as “a reputational driver”. Not much chance of that happening when the details of a case are kept secret.

In early October 2017 we submitted an FoI to SNH to try and find out more details about this case. We asked for:

  1. The name of the person who had been given a General Licence restriction (we didn’t expect to be told but thought we’d ask anyway – you never know)
  2. The occupation of that person (we already knew from the RSPB press statement that he was a gamekeeper but we wanted SNH to confirm this)
  3. The name of the county in which this individual resides (we already knew from the RSPB press statement that the alleged offence had taken place in Aberdeenshire but we wanted SNH to confirm this)
  4. The name of the estate from where the Police evidence of alleged raptor persecution had been collected
  5. An explanation about why an individual and not an estate was the recipient of the General Licence restriction
  6. An explanation about how SNH intends to monitor the activities of the individual for potential breaches of his General Licence restriction.

SNH has now responded and it’s astonishing:

It looks like SNH has been taking lessons from Natural England in the withholding of information that should be in the public domain. It’s understandable that SNH can’t disclose the alleged offender’s identity, but withholding details of his occupation and the county in which he resides because “this would allow them to be identified” is obviously nonsense, and we already know this information from the RSPB press release!

We would argue that it is in the public interest to know the name of the estate on which this alleged offence took place (and we do know from various local sources it was on a game-shooting estate and that this gamekeeper was employed by that estate). Why should that information be kept secret? Who is SNH shielding, and why?

And does anyone actually believe that Police Scotland, no matter how well-intentioned, has the resources to track this gamekeeper’s activities for the next three years to ensure he’s not breaching the terms of his General Licence restriction?!

Whilst this response doesn’t get us any further forward in knowing the specifics of this case, what it does demonstrate, quite clearly, is that the General Licence restriction, introduced as a way of publicly embarassing estates where there is evidence of wildlife crime but, due to perceieved evidential difficulties, the cases don’t ever reach the courts, is simply not working.

Tomorrow’s blog, on another General Licence restriction case, will emphasise this point again but on a whole bigger scale.